scispace - formally typeset


University of Pavia

EducationPavia, Italy
About: University of Pavia is a(n) education organization based out in Pavia, Italy. It is known for research contribution in the topic(s): Population & Large Hadron Collider. The organization has 21173 authors who have published 52524 publication(s) receiving 1610492 citation(s). The organization is also known as: Università degli Studi di Pavia & Università di Pavia.
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
Georges Aad1, T. Abajyan2, Brad Abbott3, Jalal Abdallah4  +2964 moreInstitutions (200)
Abstract: A search for the Standard Model Higgs boson in proton–proton collisions with the ATLAS detector at the LHC is presented. The datasets used correspond to integrated luminosities of approximately 4.8 fb−1 collected at View the MathML source in 2011 and 5.8 fb−1 at View the MathML source in 2012. Individual searches in the channels H→ZZ(⁎)→4l, H→γγ and H→WW(⁎)→eνμν in the 8 TeV data are combined with previously published results of searches for H→ZZ(⁎), WW(⁎), View the MathML source and τ+τ− in the 7 TeV data and results from improved analyses of the H→ZZ(⁎)→4l and H→γγ channels in the 7 TeV data. Clear evidence for the production of a neutral boson with a measured mass of View the MathML source is presented. This observation, which has a significance of 5.9 standard deviations, corresponding to a background fluctuation probability of 1.7×10−9, is compatible with the production and decay of the Standard Model Higgs boson.

8,774 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Results are presented from searches for the standard model Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s)=7 and 8 TeV in the CMS experiment at the LHC, using data samples corresponding to integrated luminosities of up to 5.1 inverse femtobarns at 7 TeV and 5.3 inverse femtobarns at 8 TeV. The search is performed in five decay modes: gamma gamma, ZZ, WW, tau tau, and b b-bar. An excess of events is observed above the expected background, a local significance of 5.0 standard deviations, at a mass near 125 GeV, signalling the production of a new particle. The expected significance for a standard model Higgs boson of that mass is 5.8 standard deviations. The excess is most significant in the two decay modes with the best mass resolution, gamma gamma and ZZ; a fit to these signals gives a mass of 125.3 +/- 0.4 (stat.) +/- 0.5 (syst.) GeV. The decay to two photons indicates that the new particle is a boson with spin different from one.

8,357 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
19 May 2016-Blood
TL;DR: The 2016 edition of the World Health Organization classification of tumors of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues represents a revision of the prior classification rather than an entirely new classification and attempts to incorporate new clinical, prognostic, morphologic, immunophenotypic, and genetic data that have emerged since the last edition.
Abstract: The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of tumors of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues was last updated in 2008. Since then, there have been numerous advances in the identification of unique biomarkers associated with some myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemias, largely derived from gene expression analysis and next-generation sequencing that can significantly improve the diagnostic criteria as well as the prognostic relevance of entities currently included in the WHO classification and that also suggest new entities that should be added. Therefore, there is a clear need for a revision to the current classification. The revisions to the categories of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia will be published in a monograph in 2016 and reflect a consensus of opinion of hematopathologists, hematologists, oncologists, and geneticists. The 2016 edition represents a revision of the prior classification rather than an entirely new classification and attempts to incorporate new clinical, prognostic, morphologic, immunophenotypic, and genetic data that have emerged since the last edition. The major changes in the classification and their rationale are presented here.

5,255 citations

Franco Brezzi1, Michel FortinInstitutions (1)
23 Nov 2011
TL;DR: Variational Formulations and Finite Element Methods for Elliptic Problems, Incompressible Materials and Flow Problems, and Other Applications.
Abstract: Variational Formulations and Finite Element Methods. Approximation of Saddle Point Problems. Function Spaces and Finite Element Approximations. Various Examples. Complements on Mixed Methods for Elliptic Problems. Incompressible Materials and Flow Problems. Other Applications.

4,907 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

4,756 citations


Showing all 21173 results

Giacomo Bruno1581687124368
Melody A. Swartz1481304103753
Peter J. Schwartz147647107695
Marco Zanetti1451439104610
Th. Müller1441798125843
Chiara Mariotti141142698157
Silvia G. Priori140515120642
Kevin Varvell138132593740
Alberto Messineo134151196492
Franco Ligabue134140495389
Michele Arneodo134133993977
Roberto Tenchini133139094541
Bruce Yabsley133119184889
Philip McGuire13388160813
Antonio Limosani133118183668
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Florence

79.5K papers, 2.3M citations

98% related

Sapienza University of Rome

155.4K papers, 4.3M citations

98% related

University of Bologna

115.1K papers, 3.4M citations

97% related

University of Padua

114.8K papers, 3.6M citations

97% related

University of Milan

139.7K papers, 4.6M citations

96% related

No. of papers from the Institution in previous years