Ohio State University

About: Ohio State University is a education organization based out in Columbus, Ohio, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 102421 authors who have published 222715 publications receiving 8373403 citations. The organization is also known as: Ohio State & The Ohio State University.

Feasibility of screening for Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer.

Abstract: Purpose Identifying individuals with Lynch syndrome (LS) is highly beneficial. However, it is unclear whether microsatellite instability (MSI) or immunohistochemistry (IHC) should be used as the screening test and whether screening should target all patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) or those in high-risk subgroups.

The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. II. UV, Optical, and Near-infrared Light Curves and Comparison to Kilonova Models

Abstract: NSF [AST-1411763, AST-1714498, DGE 1144152, PHY-1707954, AST-1518052]; NASA [NNX15AE50G, NNX16AC22G]; National Science Foundation; Kavli Foundation; Danish National Research Foundation; Niels Bohr International Academy; DARK Cosmology Centre; Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation; Heising-Simons Foundation; UCSC; Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; David and Lucile Packard Foundation; European Research Council [ERC-StG-335936]; Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation [GBMF5076]; DOE (USA); NSF (USA); MISE (Spain); STFC (UK); HEFCE (UK); NCSA (UIUC); KICP (U. Chicago); CCAPP (Ohio State); MIFPA (Texas AM); MINECO (Spain); DFG (Germany); CNPQ (Brazil); FAPERJ (Brazil); FINEP (Brazil); Argonne Lab; UC Santa Cruz; University of Cambridge; CIEMAT-Madrid; University of Chicago; University College London; DES-Brazil Consortium; University of Edinburgh; ETH Zurich; Fermilab; University of Illinois; ICE (IEEC-CSIC); IFAE Barcelona; Lawrence Berkeley Lab; LMU Munchen; Excellence Cluster Universe; University of Michigan; NOAO; University of Nottingham; Ohio State University; University of Pennsylvania; University of Portsmouth; SLAC National Lab; Stanford University; University of Sussex; Texas AM University; Gemini Observatory [GS-2017B-Q-8, GS-2017B-DD-4]

Characterization and Analysis of Porosity and Pore Structures

Abstract: Porosity plays a clearly important role in geology. It controls fluid storage in aquifers, oil and gas fields and geothermal systems, and the extent and connectivity of the pore structure control fluid flow and transport through geological formations, as well as the relationship between the properties of individual minerals and the bulk properties of the rock. In order to quantify the relationships between porosity, storage, transport and rock properties, however, the pore structure must be measured and quantitatively described. The overall importance of porosity, at least with respect to the use of rocks as building stone was recognized by TS Hunt in his “Chemical and Geological Essays” (1875, reviewed by JD Dana 1875) who noted: > “Other things being equal, it may properly be said that the value of a stone for building purposes is inversely as its porosity or absorbing power.” In a Geological Survey report prepared for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Manger (1963) summarized porosity and bulk density measurements for sedimentary rocks. He tabulated more than 900 items of porosity and bulk density data for sedimentary rocks with up to 2,109 porosity determinations per item. Amongst these he summarized several early studies, including those of Schwarz (1870–1871), Cook (1878), Wheeler (1896), Buckley (1898), Gary (1898), Moore (1904), Fuller (1906), Sorby (1908), Hirschwald (1912), Grubenmann et al. (1915), and Kessler (1919), many of which were concerned with rocks and clays of commercial utility. There have, of course, been many more such determinations since that time. There are a large number of methods for quantifying porosity, and an increasingly complex idea of what it means to do so. Manger (1963) listed the techniques by which the porosity determinations he summarized were made. He separated these into seven methods for …

NixCo3−xO4 Nanowire Arrays for Electrocatalytic Oxygen Evolution

Abstract: Oxygen evolution reaction (OER) is coupled with a number of important cathodic processes, for instance water splitting for hydrogen production. An effective electrocatalyst can reduce the overpotential and thus enhance the energy efficiency. Therefore extensive research efforts have been invested in developing inexpensive and efficient OER electrocatalysts that have sufficient stability in prolonged exposure to oxidizing conditions. Co3O4 has been demonstrated to have good efficiency and corrosion stability for the OER. It also has much lower cost than RuO2or IrO2-based catalysts. In prior reports of Co3O4, the electrodes were thin films or particle agglomerates bound together by polymers. Comparatively speaking, selfstanding nanowire (NW) arrays should have the advantages of efficient mass transfer and large surface area. To the best of our knowledge, there are still no OER studies of Co3O4 NW arrays. Moreover, despite the fact that Ni doping has been demonstrated to enhance the electrocatalytic efficiency of Co3O4, [5] there is no report on NixCo3 xO4 NWs yet. In this Communication, we report the first synthesis of mesoporous NixCo3 xO4 NW arrays and their electrocatalytic performance in OER. NW arrays grown directly on conductive substrates have several structural advantages: the open space between NWs can facilitate the diffusion of active species; the large surface areas associated with NWs and their mesoporous structures accelerate the surface reaction; and the direct contact of NWs to the underneath conductive substrate ensures each NW to participate in the reaction and also allows their direct use in the electrochemical cells. The NW arrays were grown on Ti foils in an aqueous solution containing Co(NO3)2, via the ammonia-evaporation-induced growth. Different amounts of Ni(NO3)2 were added to the solution in our efforts to tune the Ni-doping level. It is interesting to notice that different Ni(NO3)2 concentrations result in different NW surface roughness as shown in the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images in Figure 1. Pure Co3O4 NWs are about 400 nm in diameter and 15–20mm in length (Fig. 1A and 1B). They have relatively smooth surfaces. As we increased the ratio of starting Ni(NO3)2 to Co(NO3)2 precursors to 0.5:1.0 and 1.0:1.0, while keeping the total concentration of metal salts constant at 0.2 M, the corresponding NW products (denoted as NCO-1 and NCO-2 respectively) became thicker and rougher (Fig. 1C–F). The spinel crystal structure was maintained after doping, and no