@inproceedings{WolfWiese2013, author = {Wolf, Martin and Wiese, Ute}, title = {A comparative transformation model for process changes using serious games}, series = {2013 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH): proceedings of a meeting held 2-3 May 2013, Algarve, Portugal}, booktitle = {2013 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH): proceedings of a meeting held 2-3 May 2013, Algarve, Portugal}, publisher = {Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)}, address = {Piscataway, NJ}, organization = {International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health <2, 2013, Algarve>}, isbn = {978-1-4673-6164-4}, doi = {10.1109/SeGAH.2013.6665307}, pages = {64 -- 70}, year = {2013}, language = {en} } @article{ScheerWilson2016, author = {Scheer, Nico and Wilson, Ian D.}, title = {A comparison between genetically humanized and chimeric liver humanized mouse models for studies in drug metabolism and toxicity}, series = {Drug Discovery Today}, volume = {21}, journal = {Drug Discovery Today}, number = {2}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {1359-6446}, doi = {10.1016/j.drudis.2015.09.002}, pages = {250 -- 263}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Mice that have been genetically humanized for proteins involved in drug metabolism and toxicity and mice engrafted with human hepatocytes are emerging and promising in vivo models for an improved prediction of the pharmacokinetic, drug-drug interaction and safety characteristics of compounds in humans. The specific advantages and disadvantages of these models should be carefully considered when using them for studies in drug discovery and development. Here, an overview on the corresponding genetically humanized and chimeric liver humanized mouse models described to date is provided and illustrated with examples of their utility in drug metabolism and toxicity studies. We compare the strength and weaknesses of the two different approaches, give guidance for the selection of the appropriate model for various applications and discuss future trends and perspectives.}, language = {en} } @article{GerhardtCooperWhitbreadetal.1985, author = {Gerhardt, Hans Joachim and Cooper, K.-R. and Whitbread, R. and Gary, K.-P. (u.a.)}, title = {A comparison of aerodynamic drag measurements on model trucks in closed-jet and open-jet wind tunnels}, pages = {261 -- 274}, year = {1985}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{FunkeBeckmannAbanteriba2017, author = {Funke, Harald and Beckmann, Nils and Abanteriba, Sylvester}, title = {A comparison of complex chemistry mechanisms for hydrogen methane blends based on the Sandia / Sydney Bluff-Body Flame HM1}, series = {Proceedings of the Eleventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Combustion (ASPACC 2017), New South Wales, Australia, 10-14 December 2017}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the Eleventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Combustion (ASPACC 2017), New South Wales, Australia, 10-14 December 2017}, isbn = {978-1-5108-5646-2}, pages = {262 -- 265}, year = {2017}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{FingerdeVriesVosetal.2020, author = {Finger, Felix and de Vries, Reynard and Vos, Roelof and Braun, Carsten and Bil, Cees}, title = {A comparison of hybrid-electric aircraft sizing methods}, series = {AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum}, booktitle = {AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum}, doi = {10.2514/6.2020-1006}, pages = {31 Seiten}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{RauschLeiseEdereretal.2016, author = {Rausch, Lea and Leise, Philipp and Ederer, Thorsten and Altherr, Lena and Pelz, Peter F.}, title = {A comparison of MILP and MINLP solver performance on the example of a drinking water supply system design problem}, series = {ECCOMAS Congress 2016 VII European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering}, booktitle = {ECCOMAS Congress 2016 VII European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering}, editor = {Papadrakakis, M. and Ppadopoulos, V. and Stefanou, G. and Plevris, V.}, isbn = {978-618-82844-0-1}, pages = {8509 -- 8527}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Finding a good system topology with more than a handful of components is a highly non-trivial task. The system needs to be able to fulfil all expected load cases, but at the same time the components should interact in an energy-efficient way. An example for a system design problem is the layout of the drinking water supply of a residential building. It may be reasonable to choose a design of spatially distributed pumps which are connected by pipes in at least two dimensions. This leads to a large variety of possible system topologies. To solve such problems in a reasonable time frame, the nonlinear technical characteristics must be modelled as simple as possible, while still achieving a sufficiently good representation of reality. The aim of this paper is to compare the speed and reliability of a selection of leading mathematical programming solvers on a set of varying model formulations. This gives us empirical evidence on what combinations of model formulations and solver packages are the means of choice with the current state of the art.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{DachwaldSeboldtLoebetal.2007, author = {Dachwald, Bernd and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Loeb, Horst W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz}, title = {A comparison of SEP and NEP for a main belt asteroid sample return mission}, series = {7th International Symposium on Launcher Technologies, Barcelona, Spain, 02-05 April 2007}, booktitle = {7th International Symposium on Launcher Technologies, Barcelona, Spain, 02-05 April 2007}, pages = {1 -- 10}, year = {2007}, abstract = {Innovative interplanetary deep space missions, like a main belt asteroid sample return mission, require ever larger velocity increments (∆V s) and thus ever more demanding propulsion capabilities. Providing much larger exhaust velocities than chemical high-thrust systems, electric low-thrust space-propulsion systems can significantly enhance or even enable such high-energy missions. In 1995, a European-Russian Joint Study Group (JSG) presented a study report on "Advanced Interplanetary Missions Using Nuclear-Electric Propulsion" (NEP). One of the investigated reference missions was a sample return (SR) from the main belt asteroid (19) Fortuna. The envisaged nuclear power plant, Topaz-25, however, could not be realized and also the worldwide developments in space reactor hardware stalled. In this paper, we investigate, whether such a mission is also feasible using a solar electric propulsion (SEP) system and compare our SEP results to corresponding NEP results.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{KowalskiMcArdellBartelt2006, author = {Kowalski, Julia and McArdell, B. W. and Bartelt, Perry}, title = {A comparison of two approaches to modeling multiphase gravity currents}, series = {Geophysical Research Abstracts}, volume = {8}, booktitle = {Geophysical Research Abstracts}, year = {2006}, language = {en} } @article{BhattaraiStaat2019, author = {Bhattarai, Aroj and Staat, Manfred}, title = {A computational study of organ relocation after laparoscopic pectopexy to repair posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse}, series = {Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering: Imaging \& Visualization}, journal = {Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering: Imaging \& Visualization}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis}, address = {London}, issn = {2168-1171}, doi = {10.1080/21681163.2019.1670095}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{DigelDachwaldArtmannetal.2009, author = {Digel, Ilya and Dachwald, Bernd and Artmann, Gerhard and Linder, Peter and Funke, O.}, title = {A concept of a probe for particle analysis and life detection in icy environments}, pages = {1 -- 24}, year = {2009}, language = {en} }