scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Technion – Israel Institute of Technology

EducationHaifa, Israel
About: Technion – Israel Institute of Technology is a education organization based out in Haifa, Israel. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Nonlinear system. The organization has 31714 authors who have published 79377 publications receiving 2603976 citations. The organization is also known as: Technion Israel Institute of Technology & Ṭekhniyon, Makhon ṭekhnologi le-Yiśraʼel.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 2018-Allergy
TL;DR: In this paper, an evidence-and consensus-based guideline was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group.
Abstract: This evidence- and consensus-based guideline was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. The conference was held on 1 December 2016. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Sectionof the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-founded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2)LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of 48 delegates of 42 national and international societies. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease, presenting with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous urticaria and other chronic forms of urticaria are disabling, impair quality of life and affect performance at work and school. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

819 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, a general framework for robust and efficient recovery of such signals from a given set of samples is developed. But this framework does not consider the problem of reconstructing an unknown signal from a series of samples.
Abstract: Traditional sampling theories consider the problem of reconstructing an unknown signal $x$ from a series of samples. A prevalent assumption which often guarantees recovery from the given measurements is that $x$ lies in a known subspace. Recently, there has been growing interest in nonlinear but structured signal models, in which $x$ lies in a union of subspaces. In this paper we develop a general framework for robust and efficient recovery of such signals from a given set of samples. More specifically, we treat the case in which $x$ lies in a sum of $k$ subspaces, chosen from a larger set of $m$ possibilities. The samples are modelled as inner products with an arbitrary set of sampling functions. To derive an efficient and robust recovery algorithm, we show that our problem can be formulated as that of recovering a block-sparse vector whose non-zero elements appear in fixed blocks. We then propose a mixed $\ell_2/\ell_1$ program for block sparse recovery. Our main result is an equivalence condition under which the proposed convex algorithm is guaranteed to recover the original signal. This result relies on the notion of block restricted isometry property (RIP), which is a generalization of the standard RIP used extensively in the context of compressed sensing. Based on RIP we also prove stability of our approach in the presence of noise and modelling errors. A special case of our framework is that of recovering multiple measurement vectors (MMV) that share a joint sparsity pattern. Adapting our results to this context leads to new MMV recovery methods as well as equivalence conditions under which the entire set can be determined efficiently.

818 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A global, network-based method for prioritizing disease genes and inferring protein complex associations, which is called PRINCE, and applies to study three multi-factorial diseases for which some causal genes have been found already: prostate cancer, alzheimer and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Abstract: A fundamental challenge in human health is the identification of disease-causing genes. Recently, several studies have tackled this challenge via a network-based approach, motivated by the observation that genes causing the same or similar diseases tend to lie close to one another in a network of protein-protein or functional interactions. However, most of these approaches use only local network information in the inference process and are restricted to inferring single gene associations. Here, we provide a global, network-based method for prioritizing disease genes and inferring protein complex associations, which we call PRINCE. The method is based on formulating constraints on the prioritization function that relate to its smoothness over the network and usage of prior information. We exploit this function to predict not only genes but also protein complex associations with a disease of interest. We test our method on gene-disease association data, evaluating both the prioritization achieved and the protein complexes inferred. We show that our method outperforms extant approaches in both tasks. Using data on 1,369 diseases from the OMIM knowledgebase, our method is able (in a cross validation setting) to rank the true causal gene first for 34% of the diseases, and infer 139 disease-related complexes that are highly coherent in terms of the function, expression and conservation of their member proteins. Importantly, we apply our method to study three multi-factorial diseases for which some causal genes have been found already: prostate cancer, alzheimer and type 2 diabetes mellitus. PRINCE's predictions for these diseases highly match the known literature, suggesting several novel causal genes and protein complexes for further investigation.

811 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The concept and measurement of commitment to goals, a key aspect of goal-setting theory, are discussed in this paper. The strength of the relationship between commitment and performance is asserted to depend on the amount of variance in commitment.
Abstract: The concept and measurement of commitment to goals, a key aspect of goal-setting theory, are discussed. The strength of the relationship between commitment and performance is asserted to depend on the amount of variance in commitment. Three major categories of determinants of commitment are discussed: external factors (authority, peer influence, external rewards), interactive factors (participation and competition), and internal factors (expectancy, internal rewards). Applications of these ideas are made and new research directions are suggested.

810 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Lorenzo Galluzzi1, J M Bravo-San Pedro2, Ilio Vitale, Stuart A. Aaronson3, John M. Abrams4, Dieter Adam5, Emad S. Alnemri6, Lucia Altucci7, David W. Andrews8, Margherita Annicchiarico-Petruzzelli, Eric H. Baehrecke9, Nicolas G. Bazan10, Mathieu J.M. Bertrand11, Mathieu J.M. Bertrand12, Katiuscia Bianchi13, Katiuscia Bianchi14, Mikhail V. Blagosklonny15, Klas Blomgren16, Christoph Borner17, Dale E. Bredesen18, Dale E. Bredesen19, Catherine Brenner20, Catherine Brenner21, Michelangelo Campanella22, Eleonora Candi23, Francesco Cecconi23, Francis Ka-Ming Chan9, Navdeep S. Chandel24, Emily H. Cheng25, Jerry E. Chipuk3, John A. Cidlowski26, Aaron Ciechanover27, Ted M. Dawson28, Valina L. Dawson28, V De Laurenzi29, R De Maria, Klaus-Michael Debatin30, N. Di Daniele23, Vishva M. Dixit31, Brian David Dynlacht32, Wafik S. El-Deiry33, Gian Maria Fimia34, Richard A. Flavell35, Simone Fulda36, Carmen Garrido37, Marie-Lise Gougeon38, Douglas R. Green, Hinrich Gronemeyer39, György Hajnóczky6, J M Hardwick28, Michael O. Hengartner40, Hidenori Ichijo41, Bertrand Joseph16, Philipp J. Jost42, Thomas Kaufmann43, Oliver Kepp2, Daniel J. Klionsky44, Richard A. Knight22, Richard A. Knight45, Sharad Kumar46, Sharad Kumar47, John J. Lemasters48, Beth Levine49, Beth Levine50, Andreas Linkermann5, Stuart A. Lipton, Richard A. Lockshin51, Carlos López-Otín52, Enrico Lugli, Frank Madeo53, Walter Malorni54, Jean-Christophe Marine55, Seamus J. Martin56, J-C Martinou57, Jan Paul Medema58, Pascal Meier, Sonia Melino23, Noboru Mizushima41, Ute M. Moll59, Cristina Muñoz-Pinedo, Gabriel Núñez44, Andrew Oberst60, Theocharis Panaretakis16, Josef M. Penninger, Marcus E. Peter24, Mauro Piacentini23, Paolo Pinton61, Jochen H. M. Prehn62, Hamsa Puthalakath63, Gabriel A. Rabinovich64, Kodi S. Ravichandran65, Rosario Rizzuto66, Cecília M. P. Rodrigues67, David C. Rubinsztein68, Thomas Rudel69, Yufang Shi70, Hans-Uwe Simon43, Brent R. Stockwell71, Brent R. Stockwell50, Gyorgy Szabadkai66, Gyorgy Szabadkai22, Stephen W.G. Tait72, H. L. Tang28, Nektarios Tavernarakis73, Nektarios Tavernarakis74, Yoshihide Tsujimoto, T Vanden Berghe11, T Vanden Berghe12, Peter Vandenabeele12, Peter Vandenabeele11, Andreas Villunger75, Erwin F. Wagner76, Henning Walczak22, Eileen White77, W. G. Wood78, Junying Yuan79, Zahra Zakeri80, Boris Zhivotovsky16, Boris Zhivotovsky81, Gerry Melino23, Gerry Melino45, Guido Kroemer1 
Paris Descartes University1, Institut Gustave Roussy2, Mount Sinai Hospital3, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center4, University of Kiel5, Thomas Jefferson University6, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli7, University of Toronto8, University of Massachusetts Medical School9, Louisiana State University10, Flanders Institute for Biotechnology11, Ghent University12, Cancer Research UK13, Queen Mary University of London14, Roswell Park Cancer Institute15, Karolinska Institutet16, University of Freiburg17, Buck Institute for Research on Aging18, University of California, San Francisco19, Université Paris-Saclay20, French Institute of Health and Medical Research21, University College London22, University of Rome Tor Vergata23, Northwestern University24, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center25, National Institutes of Health26, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology27, Johns Hopkins University28, University of Chieti-Pescara29, University of Ulm30, Genentech31, New York University32, Pennsylvania State University33, University of Salento34, Yale University35, Goethe University Frankfurt36, University of Burgundy37, Pasteur Institute38, University of Strasbourg39, University of Zurich40, University of Tokyo41, Technische Universität München42, University of Bern43, University of Michigan44, Medical Research Council45, University of Adelaide46, University of South Australia47, Medical University of South Carolina48, University of Texas at Dallas49, Howard Hughes Medical Institute50, St. John's University51, University of Oviedo52, University of Graz53, Istituto Superiore di Sanità54, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven55, Trinity College, Dublin56, University of Geneva57, University of Amsterdam58, Stony Brook University59, University of Washington60, University of Ferrara61, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland62, La Trobe University63, University of Buenos Aires64, University of Virginia65, University of Padua66, University of Lisbon67, University of Cambridge68, University of Würzburg69, Soochow University (Suzhou)70, Columbia University71, University of Glasgow72, University of Crete73, Foundation for Research & Technology – Hellas74, Innsbruck Medical University75, Carlos III Health Institute76, Rutgers University77, University of Minnesota78, Harvard University79, City University of New York80, Moscow State University81
TL;DR: The Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death formulates a set of recommendations to help scientists and researchers to discriminate between essential and accessory aspects of cell death.
Abstract: Cells exposed to extreme physicochemical or mechanical stimuli die in an uncontrollable manner, as a result of their immediate structural breakdown. Such an unavoidable variant of cellular demise is generally referred to as ‘accidental cell death’ (ACD). In most settings, however, cell death is initiated by a genetically encoded apparatus, correlating with the fact that its course can be altered by pharmacologic or genetic interventions. ‘Regulated cell death’ (RCD) can occur as part of physiologic programs or can be activated once adaptive responses to perturbations of the extracellular or intracellular microenvironment fail. The biochemical phenomena that accompany RCD may be harnessed to classify it into a few subtypes, which often (but not always) exhibit stereotyped morphologic features. Nonetheless, efficiently inhibiting the processes that are commonly thought to cause RCD, such as the activation of executioner caspases in the course of apoptosis, does not exert true cytoprotective effects in the mammalian system, but simply alters the kinetics of cellular demise as it shifts its morphologic and biochemical correlates. Conversely, bona fide cytoprotection can be achieved by inhibiting the transduction of lethal signals in the early phases of the process, when adaptive responses are still operational. Thus, the mechanisms that truly execute RCD may be less understood, less inhibitable and perhaps more homogeneous than previously thought. Here, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death formulates a set of recommendations to help scientists and researchers to discriminate between essential and accessory aspects of cell death.

809 citations


Authors

Showing all 31937 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Robert Langer2812324326306
Nicholas G. Martin1921770161952
Tobin J. Marks1591621111604
Grant W. Montgomery157926108118
David Eisenberg156697112460
David J. Mooney15669594172
Dirk Inzé14964774468
Jerrold M. Olefsky14359577356
Joseph J.Y. Sung142124092035
Deborah Estrin135562106177
Bruce Yabsley133119184889
Jerry W. Shay13363974774
Richard N. Bergman13047791718
Shlomit Tarem129130686919
Allen Mincer129104080059
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Imperial College London
209.1K papers, 9.3M citations

93% related

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
268K papers, 18.2M citations

92% related

University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
225.1K papers, 10.1M citations

92% related

Stanford University
320.3K papers, 21.8M citations

92% related

University of Toronto
294.9K papers, 13.5M citations

92% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023147
2022390
20213,397
20203,526
20193,273
20183,131