Over the past decades, we have adopted computers into virtually every aspect of our lives, but in doing so, we’ve made ourselves vulnerable to malicious interference or hacking. I had the opportunity to talk about this with Miroslav Pajic, the Dickinson Family associate professor in Duke’s electrical and computer engineering department. He has worked on cybersecurity in self-driving cars, medical devices, and even US Air Force hardware.
Miroslav Pajic is an electrical engineer
Pajic primarily works in “assured autonomy,” computers that do most things by themselves with “high-level autonomy and low human control and oversight.” “You want to build systems with strong performance and safety guarantees every time, in all conditions,” Pajic said. Assured Autonomy ensures security in “contested environments” where malicious interference can be expected. The stakes of this work are incredibly high. The danger of attacks on military equipment goes without saying, but cybersecurity on a civilian level can be just as dangerous. “Imagine,” he told me, “that you have a smart city coordinating traffic and that… all of (the traffic controls), at the same time, start doing weird things. There can be a significant impact if all cars stop, but imagine if all of them start speeding up.”
Pajic and some of his students with an autonomous car.
Since Pajic works with Ph.D. students and postdocs, I wanted to ask him how COVID-19 has affected his work. As if on cue, his wifi cut out, and he dropped from our zoom call. “This is a perfect example of how fun it is to work remotely,” he said when he returned. “Imagine that you’re debugging a fleet of drones… and that happens.”
In all seriousness, though, there are simulators created for working on cybersecurity and assured autonomy. CARLA, for one, is an open-source simulator of self-driving vehicles made by Intel. Even outside of a pandemic, these simulators are used extensively in the field. They’ve become very useful in returning accurate and cheap results without any actual risk, before graduating to real tests.
“If you’re going to fail,” Pajic says, “you want to fail quickly.”
Guest Post by Riley Richardson, Class of 2021, NC School of Science and Math
We are all born with defining physical characteristics. Whether it be piercing blue eyes or jet black hair, these traits distinguish us throughout our entire lives. However, there is something that all of our attributes have in common, a shared origin: genes.
Beyond dictating our individual features, genes instruct cells to create proteins that are essential for a variety of processes, from controlling muscle function to managing digestive systems. Despite their importance in the workings of our body, genes can also code for detrimental diseases, such as Huntington’s disease or Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
Raluca Gordân, Ph.D.
These types of diseases are exactly what Raluca Gordân, Ph.D. is battling through her research. She and her group are trying to figure out how to decode the non-coding genome, the DNA apart from protein-coding genes. They are deepening their understanding of the role non-coding areas of the genome play in the expression of the coding genes and the production of proteins.
Gordân, an associate professor in biostatistics and bioinformatics at Duke, said a majority of disease-causing genetic mutations derive from the genome outside of genes.
“That is a huge search space,” she says, chuckling. “Genes only make up about 2% of the genome. If we don’t understand what those non-coding regions are doing, it’s hard to make predictions about what the mutation in those regions would be doing and how to connect that to the development of a disease.”
Gordân recently published a paper, entitled “DNA mismatches reveal conformational penalties in protein–DNA recognition,” which focuses on transcription factors and their exceptional ability to bind to mispaired DNA, misspellings that occur as DNA is copied. During regular replication, nucleotide bases (the building blocks of our DNA) are paired correctly, where adenine pairs with thymine and cytosine goes with guanine. However, when an error occurs during replication, mispairs start to appear, as adenine may pair with guanine instead.
“Normally, those are mistakes that get repaired by specific mismatch repair pathways but that repair might not happen if one of these transcription factors sits on the replication error and doesn’t allow the repair mechanism to see it,” Gordân explains. “Normally, one would expect the transcription factors not to bind to those errors. But we found that they can bind way better than their actual genomic targets.”
Modeling of the binding between mismatched DNA and transcription factors.
To expand on her computational discovery, Gordân is now following up with a study of transcription factor binding to mismatches in living cells, observing whether they adopt their usual role of regulating gene expression or contribute to the development of mutations.
Gordân’s research is a product of her passion and desire to make change. It also can be attributed to a series of realizations she made during college and inspirational mentors who guided her along the way.
While pursuing her undergraduate degree, Gordân was a purely computer science major, concentrating on cryptography. However, as she was nearing the end of her four years of college, she soon found herself yearning for the opportunity to do more. She began looking into machine learning applications and enrolled in a course based around genetic algorithms which she credits for launching her career path.
At that point, she attained what she describes as her “first taste of genetics” and her interest in bioinformatics was irrevocably piqued. Thereafter, Gordân applied for a PhD at Duke, where she worked with advisor Alex Hartemink investigating transcription factor proteins in regulatory genomics. At Duke, her work was primarily computational. But with her postdoctoral advisor Martha Bulyk of Harvard Medical School, Gordan was exposed to the more experimental aspects of biology.
Today, she recognizes these experiences as integral to her ongoing research, which requires her to frequently iterate between observational approaches and computational work.
Gordân is acclimating to the newly quarantined world. While she strives to continue her research, in the pandemic, it has changed her routine.
“I think what was affected a lot since the pandemic started is the fact that we don’t meet in person,” she says. “A lot of the quick progress was being made when we were in the same physical space and were able to get feedback immediately, with students learning about each other’s results in the lab, in real time. That was replaced with Zoom meetings, where students get to see the other students’ results mainly at lab meetings, weeks or months later. Those continuous discussions that were going on in the lab all the time. We’re missing that.”
Gordân offered some thoughtful parting advice to aspiring computational biologists, like me.
“I was trained as a computer scientist, so I wasn’t really sure about experimental work. But after actually doing the experimental work, I realized how much value there is in doing both,” she said. “You have to pick what you’re strongest at, either the computational or experimental part, but you should not be afraid of the other side.”
Guest Post by Akshra Paimagam, Class of 2021, NC School of Science and Math
The sudden need for contact-tracing technologies to address the Covid-19 pandemic is inspiring some miraculous human ingenuity.
Wednesday, December 16th, Rodney Jenkins, Praudman Jain, and Kartik Nayak discussed Covid-19 contact tracing and the role of new technologies in a forum organized by the Duke Mobile App Gateway team.
Jenkins is the Health Director of Durham County’s Department of Public Health, Jain is CEO and founder of Vibrent Health. And Nayak is an Assistant Professor in Duke’s Computer Science department. The panel was hosted by Leatrice Martin (M.B.A.), Senior Program Coordinator for Duke’s Mobile App Gateway with Duke’s Clinical and Translational Science Institute.
Panelists, left to right: Rodney Jenkins (M.P.H.), Praudman Jain (M.S.), and Kartik Nayak (Ph.D.)
Contact tracing is critical to slowing the spread of Covid, and Jenkins says it’s not going away anytime soon. Jenkins, who only began his position with Durham County Public Health in January 2020, said Durham County’s contact tracing has been… interesting. As the virus approached Durham, “Durham County suffered a severe malware attack that really rendered platforms…useless.”
Eventually, though, the department developed its own method of tracing through trial and error. North Carolina’s Department of Health and Human Services (NC HHS), like many other health departments across the nation in March, was scrambling to adjust. NC HHS was not able to provide support for Durham’s contact tracing until July, when Jenkins identified a serious need for reinforcement due to disproportionate Covid cases amongst Latinx community members. In the meantime, Durham county received help from Duke’s Physician Assistant students and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Foundation. They expanded their team of five to 95 individuals investigating and tracing Durham County’s positive cases.
Rodney Jenkins MPH is the health director of the Durham County Public Health Department.
Jenkins proclaimed contact tracing as “sacred to public health” and a necessary element to “boxing in” Covid-19 – along with widespread testing.
Durham’s tracing tool is conducted through a HIPPA-compliant, secure online portal. Data about individuals is loaded into the system, transmitted to the contact tracing team, and then the team calls close contacts to enable a quick quarantine response. The department had to “make a huge jump very quickly,” said Jenkins. It was this speedy development and integration of new technology that has helped Durham County Public Health better manage the pandemic.
Jain, along with colleague Rachele Peterson, spoke about his company, Vibrent Health. Vibrent, which was recently awarded a five-year grant from the National Institutes of Health’s ‘ll of Us Research Program, is focused on creating and dispersing digital and mobile platforms for public health.
Naturally, this includes a new focus on Covid. With renewed interest in and dependency on contact tracing, Jain says there is a need for different tools to help various stakeholders – from researchers to citizens to government. He believes technology can “become the underlying infrastructure for accelerating science.”
Vibrent identified needs for a national tracing model, including the labor intensity of manual processes, disparate tools, and lack of automation.
Peterson said that as we “are all painfully aware,” the U.S. was not prepared for Covid, resulting in no national tracing solution. She offered that the success of tracing has been mostly due to efforts of “local heroes” like Jenkins. Through their five-year award, Vibrent is developing a next-generation tracing solution that they hope will better target infectious spread, optimize response time, reduce labor burden in managing spread, and increase public trust.
On left, Jain provided background information on his company, Vibrent Health. On right, Peterson outlined the current state of contact tracing in the U.S. and identified needs for a national tracing system.
Along with an online digital interface, the company is partnering with Virginia Commonwealth University to work on a statistical modeling system. Peterson likened their idea to the Waze navigation app, which relies on users to add important, real-time data. They hope to offer a visualization tool to identify individuals in close contact with infected or high-risk persons and identify places or routes where users are at higher risk.
Nayak closed the panel by discussing his work on a project complementary to contact tracing, dubbed Poirot. Poirot will use aggregated private contact summary data. Because physical distancing is key to preventing Covid spread, Nayak said it is both important and difficult to measure physical interactions through contact events due to privacy concerns over sensitive data. Using Duke as the case study, Poirot will help decision makers answer questions about which buildings have the most contact events or which populations – faculty versus students – are at higher risk. The technology can also help individuals identify how many daily contacts they have or the safest time of day to visit a particular building.
On left, Poirot’s design. On right, examples of Poirot’s uses by decision makers and individuals.
Nayak said users will only be able to learn about their own contact events, as well as aggregate stats, while decision makers can only access aggregate statistics and have no ability to link data to individuals.
Users will log into a Duke server and then privately upload their data using a technology called blinded tokens. Contact events will be discovered with the help of continuously changing, random identifiers with data summation at intermittent intervals. Data processing will use multiparty computation and differential privacy to ensure information is delinked from individuals. The tool is expected for release in the spring.
Screenshot of Duke’s Mobile App Gateway site.
Although we are just starting vaccination, the need for nationwide resources “will be ongoing,” Martin said.
We should continue to embrace contact tracing because widespread vaccination will take time, Jenkins said.
Jenkins, Jain, and Nayak are but a few who have stepped up to respond innovatively to Covid. It becomes increasingly apparent that we will continue to need individuals like them, as well as their technological tools, to ease the burden of an overworked and unprepared health system as the pandemic prevails in America.
New study casts doubt on links between personality and brain structure. MRI scan courtesy of Annchen Knodt, Duke University
We know personality comes from the brain, but does that mean the brain’s shape and composition affect personality as well?
Previous studies have attempted to find links between brain structure and personality types, but new data indicates otherwise. A new study, the largest of its kind, suggests these links may not be so strong after all. In fact, they may not even exist.
Recently Duke researchers, led by Reut Avinun Ph.D., a postdoctoral associate at Professor Ahmad Hariri’s lab, analyzed the MRI scans of over a thousand people to determine potential links between personality and brain shape.
Although there are many personality neuroscience studies, consistent and reliable findings have not been established. While most previous studies used less than 300 individuals, this study has a large sample of 1,107 individuals. Additionally, this research comprehensively measures personality with 240 items.
“When I got into the field, people were collecting data sets with only 10 people and doing analysis with only 20 participants,” said Avram Holmes, an asssociate professor of psychology at Yale who was not involved in the study.
Personality studies such as this typically use the “Big Five” personality traits: neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness-to-experience. Extraverted people tend to be outgoing and social and those with high openness-to-experience are imaginative, curious, and enjoy trying new things. High neuroticism and low conscientiousness have been associated with negative health behaviors such as smoking. These were even connected to negative life outcomes, such as depression, anxiety, and poor sleep. By understanding what underlies these behaviors, scientists may be able to better treat them.
For brain shape, Avinun and her colleagues examined brain morphometry, cortical thickness, cortical surface area, subcortical volume, and white matter microstructural integrity. She used a univariate approach, looking at the relationship between one phenotype and one behavior. Statistical analysis also accounted for the factors of race/ethnicity, sex, and age.
Last year, researchers published a paper finding 15 correlations between specific personality traits and neuroanatomical structures. However, Avinun’s new research found that none of these connections held true in the large Duke Neurogenetics Study sample.
When scientists analyze an MRI dataset, there is a lot of freedom in the phenotypes collected and the types of analyses. “With so many degrees of investigative freedom and the expectation that you should see something there, researchers may accidentally find false positives. It’s easy to fall into the trap of making a story about why the effect has this particular brain pattern and see an association that doesn’t exist,” Holmes explained.
Ultimately, Avinun found no links between the Big Five personality traits and multiple features of brain structure.
While this may seem anticlimactic, even null findings are incredibly useful and could lead to recommendations to future research in this area. By showing that links between brain morphometry and personality tend to be small, this research may push the field toward studies with larger samples and guidelines for higher replication rates.
“The brain is plastic and it is affected every day by our experiences, so expecting to find straightforward associations between brain morphometry and personality traits may be too naïve,” Avinun said. “We are beginning to realize that large samples and multivariate methods are needed in neuroscience. Trying to understand what makes us who we are is exciting. Research is really challenging as the field is constantly changing, but it is constantly improving as well.”
Niba Nirmal is a multimedia science communicator based in San Francisco, CA. She graduated in the Duke class of 2020, with a Master’s degree in Genetics. Find samples of her work at www.notesbyniba.com
TikTok’s illicit collection of user data recently drew fire from US officials. But TikTok’s base—largely young adults under 25—was unfazed. In viral videos posted in July and August, users expressed little concern about their digital privacy.
“If china wants to know how obsessed i am with hockey,” wrote one user, “then just let them its not a secret.” “#Takemydata,” captioned another, in a video racking up 6,000 likes and over 42,000 views.
As digital technologies become ever more pervasive – or even invasive – concerns for privacy should be a concern, a pair of experts said in a Duke Science & Society webinar earlier this month.
TikTok and digital marketing aside, data collection can have real, tangible benefits. Case in point: COVID-19. Researchers at Duke and elsewhere are using peoples’ fitness trackers and smart watches to try to understand and predict the pandemic’s spread by monitoring a variety of health metrics, producing real-time snapshots of heart rate, blood pressure, sleep quality, and more. Webinar speaker Jessilyn Dunn of Duke biomedical engineering and her team have tapped into this data for CovIdentify, a Duke-funded effort to predict COVID infections using data collected by smartphones and wearable devices.
Health data from smartphones and fitness trackers may help predict and identify disease.
For several years, Dunn’s lab has researched digital biomarkers of disease—that is, how health data collected by tech we carry every day can predict anything from heart disease to cognitive decline.
It’s a potential goldmine: One recent poll suggests that 40 million Americans own some kind of smartwatch or fitness tracker. And the wearables market is rapidly expanding—by 2022, it may be worth upwards of 25 billion dollars.
As coronavirus cases began to rise in the US, Dunn’s lab quickly pivoted to develop COVID-specific biomarkers. “We have these devices … that perform physiologic monitoring,” Dunn said, “This is a method of taking vitals continuously to try to monitor what’s going on with people.”
Say you’re a participant in Dr. Dunn’s study. You download the CovIdentify app, which analyzes health data collected by your phone or smartwatch. Short daily surveys then assess your exposure to COVID-19 and whether you’ve developed any symptoms. Dunn and her team hope to find a link, some specific change in vitals that corresponds to COVID-19 infection.
There are some challenges. CovIdentify must account for variability between devices—data collected from a Fitbit, for example, might differ dramatically from an Apple Watch. And because COVID-19 manifests in unique ways across populations, a truly universal biomarker may not exist.
However, panelist Marielle Gross—a bioethicist at the University of Pittsburgh—said projects like Dunn’s raise questions of digital privacy. Gross emphasized how easily our health data can be abused.
Left: Jessilyn Dunn, PhD, a professor at Duke University and CovIdentify Researcher Right: Marielle Gross, MD, MBE, a bioethicist and professor at the University of Pittsburgh
“Digital specimen is the digital representation of the human body,” she said. “Disrespecting it disrespects the body it represents.”
Dr. Gross cited South Korea’s efforts to curb COVID-19 as a cautionary tale. As part of the government’s response, which quickly minimized cases early in the pandemic, exposed or infected South Koreans were expected to stay home and isolate, tracked using GPS-enabled devices.
But many South Koreans chose to leave their devices at home, rather than be tracked by their government. In response, the government required its citizens to carry their devices, 24/7. In a pandemic, desperate measures may be called for. But, Gross suggests, it isn’t hard to imagine a grimmer future—where the government requires all citizens to share their location, all the time.
Gross argues that we must fundamentally shift how we think about our personal data. “There’s this broad assumption that we have to give up privacy to reap the benefits of collective data.” Gross noted. “And that’s false.”
Most ‘digital natives’ aren’t naive. They’re well aware that internet companies collect, analyze, and sell their data, sometimes to malicious effect. But many view data collection as a necessary tradeoff for an intuitive and tailored web experience.
So where do we go from here? Dr. Gross points to new developments like zero knowledge proofs, which use complex algorithms to verify data without actually seeing it. This technique promises anonymity without compromising the value of collective data. And as computing power increases, it may also be possible to perform real-time analysis without ever transmitting or storing collected health data.
And for future tech? In Dr. Gross’s opinion, ethical implications must be considered from day one. “Those sorts of considerations are not the kind of thing that you can tack on later. They have to be built into devices…at the ground floor.”
This squiggly line shows the path taken by a snippet of DNA as it might move around within the soupy interior of a cell. Duke’s Kevin Welsher and colleagues have developed a technique that turns a microscope into a ‘flight tracker’ for molecules, making it possible to follow the paths of viruses and other particles thousands of times smaller than the period at the end of this sentence. Until now, such techniques have required particles to be tethered to make sure they stay within the field of view. But the Welsher lab has developed a way to lock on to freely moving targets and track them for minutes at a time.
Many university labs may have gone quiet amid coronavirus shutdowns, but faculty continue to analyze data, publish papers and write grants. In this guest post from Duke chemistry professor David Beratan and colleagues, the researchers describe a new study showing how water’s ability to shepherd electrons can change with subtle shifts in a water molecule’s 3-D structure:
Water, the humble combination of hydrogen and oxygen, is essential for life. Despite its central place in nature, relatively little is known about the role that single water molecules play in biology.
Researchers at Duke University, in collaboration with Arizona State University, Pennsylvania State University and University of California-Davis have studied how electrons flow though water molecules, a process crucial for the energy-generating machinery of living systems. The team discovered that the way that water molecules cluster on solid surfaces enables the molecules to be either strong or weak mediators of electron transfer, depending on their orientation. The team’s experiments show that water is able to adopt a higher- or a lower-conducting form, much like the electrical switch on your wall. They were able to shift between the two structures using large electric fields.
In a previous paper published fifteen years ago in the journal Science, Duke chemistry professor David Beratan predicted that water’s mediation properties in living systems would depend on how the water molecules are oriented.
Water assemblies and chains occur throughout biological systems. “If you know the conducting properties of the two forms for a single water molecule, then you can predict the conducting properties of a water chain,” said Limin Xiang, a postdoctoral scholar at University of California, Berkeley, and the first author of the paper.
“Just like the piling up of Lego bricks, you could also pile up a water chain with the two forms of water as the building blocks,” Xiang said.
In addition to discovering the two forms of water, the authors also found that water can change its structure at high voltages. Indeed, when the voltage is large, water switches from a high- to a low-conductive form. In fact, it is may be possible that this switching could gate the flow of electron charge in living systems.
This study marks an important first step in establishing water synthetic structures that could assist in making electrical contact between biomolecules and electrodes. In addition, the research may help reveal nature’s strategies for maintaining appropriate electron transport through water molecules and could shed light on diseases linked to oxidative damage processes.
The researchers dedicate this study to the memory of Prof. Nongjian (NJ) Tao.
Martin Brooke is no
ordinary Engineering professor at Duke University. He teaches computer scientists,
engineers, and technology nerds how to dance.
Brooke co-teaches Performance and Technology, an interactive course where students create performance projects and discuss theoretical and historical implications of technologies in performance. In a unique partnership with Thomas DeFrantz, a professor of African and African American Studies and Dance students will design a technology based on “heart,” for example, in order to understand how human expression is embedded in technology. Two weeks later, they’ll interact with motion-sensing, robotic trees that give hugs; and 3D printed hearts that detect colors and match people, sort of like a robotic tinder.
Thomas DeFrantz (left) and Martin Brooke watch their students perform in the Performance and Technology course .
Brooke loves that this class is fun and interactive, but more importantly he loves that this class teaches students how to consider people’s emotions, facial expressions, cultural differences, cultural similarities and interactions when designing new technologies.
Human interface is when a computerized program or device
takes input from humans — like an image of a face — and gives an output — like
unlocking a phone. In order for these devices to understand human interface,
the programmer must first understand how humans express themselves. This means
that scientists, programmers, and engineers need to understand a particular
school of learning: the humanities. “There are very, very few scientists who do human interface research,” Brooke
said.
The students designed a robotic “Tinder” that changes colors when it detects a match.
Brooke also mentioned the
importance of understanding human expressions and interactions in order to
limit computer bias. Computer bias occurs when a programmer’s prejudiced
opinions of others are transferred into the computer products they design. For
example, many recent studies have proven that facial recognition software
inaccurately identifies black individuals when searching for suspects of a
criminal case.
“It turns out one of the biggest problems with technology today is human interface,” Brooke said. “Microsoft found out that they had a motion sensitive Artificial Intelligence that tended to say women, [more often than men], were angry.” Brooke said he didn’t consider the importance of incorporating the arts and humanities into engineering before coming to Duke. He suggested that it can be uncomfortable for some scientists to think and express themselves artistically. “[When] technologists [take Performance and Technology], for example, they are terrified of the performance aspects of it. We have some video of a guy saying, ‘I didn’t realize I was going to have to perform.’ Yeah, that’s what we were actually quite worried about, but in the end, he’s there in the video, doing slow motion running on stage — fully involved, actually performing, and really enjoying it.
Duke has a strong initiative to promote arts and humanities inclusion in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Brooke plans to bring Bass Connections, a research program that focuses on public outreach and cross-disciplinary work, to his Performance and Technology class before the end of the semester to demonstrate bias through a program he callsAI Bias In the Age of a Technical Elite.
“You give it someone’s name and it will come up with a
movie title, their role, and a synopsis of the movie,” Brooke said. “When I put
in my name, which is an English name, it said that the movie I would be in is
about a little boy who lives in the English countryside who turns into a
monster and terrorizes the town.” This program shows even something as
simple as a name can have so much stigma attached to it.
Bass Connections Students working on technology and engineering projects. (From the official Duke page for Bass Connections.)
Brooke’s hope is that his class teaches students to think about technology and human interface. “Hopefully that’s a real benefit to them when they get out actually designing products.”
Guest post by Jordan Anderson, a masters student in Science & Society
On any average weekday at Duke University, a walk through the Engineering Quad and down Science Drive would yield the vibrant and exciting sight of bleary-eyed, caffeine-dependent college students heading to labs or lectures, most definitely with Airpods stuck in their ears.
But on Saturday, February 22nd, a glance towards this side of campus would have shown you nearly 200 energetic and chatty female and female-identifying 4th to 6th graders from the Durham area. As part of Capstone, an event organized by Duke FEMMES, these students spent the day in a series of four hands-on STEM activities designed to give them exposure to different science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines.
Nina MacLeod, 10, gets grossed out when viewing fruit fly larvae through a microscope while her guide, Duke first-year Sweta Kafle, waits patiently. (Jared Lazarus)
FEMMES, which stands for Females Excelling More in Math, Engineering, and Science, is an organization comprised of Duke students with the aim of improving female participation in STEM subjects. Their focus starts young: FEMMES uses hands-on programming for young girls and hosts various events throughout the year, including after-school activities at nearby schools and summer camps.
Capstone was a day of fun STEM exposure divided into four events stationed along Science Drive and E-Quad — two in the morning, and two in the afternoon, with a break for lunch. Students were separated into groups of around eight, and were led by two to three Duke undergraduates and a high school student. The day started bright and early at 8:45 A.M with keynote speaker Stacy Bilbo, Duke professor of Psychology and Neuroscience.
Staci Bilbo
Bilbo explained that her work centers around microglial cells, a type of brain cell. A series of slides about her journey into a science career sparked awe, especially as she remarked that microglial cells are significant players in our immune system, but scientists used to know nearly nothing about them. Perhaps most impactful, however, was a particular slide depicting microglial cells as macrophages, because they literally eat cellular debris and dead neurons.
A cartoon depiction of this phenomenon generated a variety of reactions from the young audience, including but not limited to: “I’m NEVER being a doctor!”, “I wish I was a microglial cell!”, “Ew, why are brains so gross?”, and “I’m so glad I’m not a brain because that’s SO weird.”
Durham area students learned how to perform a blood pressure check during a FEMMES session taught by Duke EMS, an all-volunteer, student-run division of the police department and Duke Life Flight. Duke senior Kayla Corredera-Wells (center) put the blood pressure cuff on sophomore Pallavi Avasarala. (Jared Lazarus)
This creates a chicken-and-egg story: girls don’t enter STEM at the same rate as their male counterparts, and as a result, future generations of girls are discouraged from pursuing STEM because they don’t see as many accomplished, visibly female scientists to look up to. Spaces like Capstone which encourage hands-on activity are key to exposing girls to the same activities that their male counterparts engage in on a regular basis – and to exposing girls to a world of incredible science and discovery led by other females.
After Bilbo’s talk, it was off to the activities, led by distinguished female professors at Duke — a nod to the importance of representation when encouraging female participation in science. For example, one of the computer science activities, led by Susan Rodger, taught girls how to use basic CS skills to create 3-D interactive animation.
An introduction to categorizing different minerals based on appearance was led by Emily Klein, while one of the medicine-centered activities involved Duke EMS imparting first aid skills onto the students.
For one of the biology-themed activities, Nina Sherwood and Emily Ozdowski (dubbed “The Fly Ladies”) showed students fruit flies under a microscope. The activity clearly split the group: girls who stared in glee at unconscious flies, shrieking “It’s SO BIG, look at it!” and girls who exchanged disgusted looks, edging their swivel chairs as far as physically possible from the lab benches. Elizabeth Bucholz, a Biomedical Engineering professor, led one of the engineering activities, showing students how CT scans generate images using paper, a keychain light and a block (meant to represent the body). In math, meanwhile, Shira Viel used the activity of jump-roping to show how fractions can untangle the inevitable and ensuing snarls.
The day definitely wasn’t all science. During lunch in LSRC’s Love Auditorium, most groups spread out after scarfing down pizza and spent intense focus over learning (and recording) TikTok dances, and when walking down Science Drive under blue and sunny skies, conversations ranged from the sequins on someone’s Ugg boots to how to properly bathe one’s dog, to yelling erupting over someone confidently proclaiming that they were a die-hard Tar Heel.
Nina Sherwood, Associate Professor of Biology, showed Emma Zhang, 9, some fruit flies, which we study because they share 75% of their genes with humans. (Jared Lazarus)
A raffle at the end of the day for the chance to win Duke merchandise inspired many closed eyes and crossed fingers (“I want a waterbottle so bad, you have no idea!”) And as newfound friends said goodbye to each other and wistfully bonded over how much fun they had at the end of the day, one thing was clear: events like Capstone are crucial to instilling confidence and a love of STEM in girls.
What happens when Netflix dies? To open Duke Libraries’ Fair Use Week, Kyle Courtney, copyright advisor for Harvard University, and Will Cross, director of the Copyright and Digital Scholarship Center at North Carolina State University, spoke at Duke about the threats that licensing and copyright pose to cultural heritage on February 24th.
One responsibility – among many – of modern-day librarians is that of preservation. However, streaming services like Netflix and Hulu change the ways that librarians are able to do their jobs. Though Cross said that the constraints of copyright may actually help librarians archive culture in its many forms, licensing has introduced the need to negotiate preservation work.
Consumer-licensed materials, such as those provided on streaming services, have a bias of economic efficiency and make the mission of archiving nearly impossible, leaving many wondering, “How do we librarian? How do we scholar?”
Cross offered that modern-day culture is being built behind paywalls and that terms of service and contract laws prioritize the gain of individual companies and minimize the ways in which digital culture manifested on Netflix, Hulu, and other streaming companies are able to serve society. In other words, culture is becoming privately owned.
Cross also argued that if libraries didn’t already exist, there would no longer be any way to create them because even freely available items such as certain e-books are being made exclusively available through consumer licensed spaces.
Enter Fair Use. Fair Use is a doctrine in US copyright law that allows certain copyrighted materials to be used without permission from or payment to copyright holders if the use complies with four factors of use. The policy benefits scholars, students, and the general public in many ways by facilitating information-sharing and knowledge-creation. It can grant the use of copyrighted works for particular purposes and limits the monopoly of a copyright owner over the work in question. Courtney and Cross believe that Fair Use could provide a potential solution to the limitations currently being put on librarians’ ability to preserve content from streaming services.
The Fair Use logo
The current lack of a market for preserving streaming service content is a positive for people like Courtney and Cross who are advocating the need to archive these types of work. Not having a market means preservation poses little to no harm to the business of streaming services. Several case studies offer additional hope for the potential to circumvent preservation restrictions by using the rights of Fair Use.
However they said, there is little time to waste. So far, companies like Netflix are currently hesitant or completely reluctant to engage in the conversations about archival preservation that Courtney and Cross bring to the table.
Courtney says that companies like Hulu or Disney+ are not thinking about having scholars watch “Black Mirror” 100 years from now, but rather about earnings from fiscal quarter-to-quarter. Licensing does not address preservation or access concerns, and if all the streaming services suddenly went belly-up it’s probable that some of the unique content from these companies would be lost forever.
“If we don’t act … we may be losing culture left, right, and center,” Courtney said.
