We describe here the most ambitious survey currently planned in the optical, the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST). The LSST design is driven by four main science themes: probing dark energy and dark matter, taking an inventory of the solar system, exploring the transient optical sky, and mapping the Milky Way. LSST will be a large, wide-field ground-based system designed to obtain repeated images covering the sky visible from Cerro Pachón in northern Chile. The telescope will have an 8.4 m (6.5 m effective) primary mirror, a 9.6 deg 2 field of view, a 3.2-gigapixel camera, and six filters (ugrizy) covering the wavelength range 320-1050 nm. The project is in the construction phase and will begin regular survey operations by 2022. About 90% of the observing time will be devoted to a deep-wide-fast survey mode that will uniformly observe a 18,000 deg 2 region about 800 times (summed over all six bands) during the anticipated 10 yr of operations and will yield a co-added map to r∼27.5. These data will result in databases including about 32 trillion observations of 20 billion galaxies and a similar number of stars, and they will serve the majority of the primary science programs. The remaining 10% of the observing time will be allocated to special projects such as Very Deep and Very Fast time domain surveys, whose details are currently under discussion. We illustrate how the LSST science drivers led to these choices of system parameters, and we describe the expected data products and their characteristics.

Theoretical accounts of the speed-accuracy trade-off in rapid movement have usually focused on within-movement error detection and correction, and have consistently ignored the possibility that motor-output variability might be predictably related to movement amplitude and movement time. This article presents a theory of motor-output variability that accounts for the relationship among the movement amplitude, movement time, the mass to be moved, and the resulting movement error. Predictions are derived from physical principles; empirical evidence supporting the principles is presented for three movement paradigms (single-aiming responses, reciprocal movements, and rapid-timing tasks); and the theory and data are discussed in terms of past theoretical accounts and future research directions. Examining the current level of understanding about the production and control of motor responses, many would no doubt be tempted to say that we have not come very far since the early writings of Woodworth (1899) and Hollingworth (1909). These writers were concerned with the basic laws of limb movements (analogous, perhaps to the basic laws of motion that were the cornerstone of physics) that denned the relationship between the simplest aspects of motor

The BESTest is easy to learn to administer, with excellent reliability and very good validity. It is unique in allowing clinicians to determine the type of balance problems to direct specific treatments for their patients. By organizing clinical balance test items already in use, combined with new items not currently available, the BESTest is the most comprehensive clinical balance tool available and warrants further development.

1. Control of posture in quiet stance has been quantified by center of pressure (COP) changes in the anterior-posterior (A/P) and medial-lateral (M/L) directions from a single force platform. Recording from a single force platform, researchers are unable to recognize two separate mechanisms that become evident when two force platforms are used. Depending on the stance position taken, many combinations of an ankle mechanism and a hip (load/unload) mechanism are evident. In side-by-side stance, A/P balance is totally under ankle (plantar/dorsiflexor) control, whereas M/L balance is under hip (abductor/adductor) control. In tandem stance, the A/P balance is dominated by the hip mechanism, with mixed and small or sometimes negligible contributions by the ankle plantar/dorsiflexors: for M/L balance, the reverse is evident; ankle invertors/evertors dominate, with mixed and small contribution from the hip load/unload mechanism. In an intermediate 45 degrees stance position, both ankle and hip mechanisms contribute to the net balance control in totally different ways. In the M/L direction the two strategies reinforce, whereas in the A/P direction the ankle mechanism must overcome and cancel most of the inappropriate contribution by the hip load/unload mechanism. A spatial plot of the separate mechanisms reveals the fact that the random-looking COP scatter plot is nothing more than a spatial and temporal summation of two separate spatial plots. A straight line joining the individual COPs under each foot is the load/unload line controlled by the hip mechanism. At right angles to this load/unload line in the side-by-side and tandem positions is the independent control line by the ankle muscles. In an intermediate standing position, the separate control lines exist, but now the ankle control is not orthogonal to the load/unload line; rather, it acts at an angle of approximately 60 degrees. The direction of these ankle control and load/unload lines also allows us to pinpoint the muscle groups responsible at the ankle and hip in any of the stance positions.

No abstract