The Interdependence of Research Funding Concentration, Policy Priorities, and Problem Choice

The prioritisation of research funding towards a small elite of researchers and research topics of "strategic" importance are becoming a norm across national research systems. Researchers are increasingly worried that such steering hampers the diversity of scientific approaches and problems addressed. However, the effects of increased steering of who and what receives research funds are not well known. I use evidence from 65,000 research grants awarded by seven research councils in the United Kingdom and fifteen Danish research funders to investigate how strong funding concentration and thematic targeting leads to less topical diversity. Researchers in the very top of the funding distribution primarily investigate topics and disciplines with the most funding success, and research output form targeted funding schemes overlaps with that from investigatorledgrants. Moreover, priorities from private funders line up with the type of researchfunded by public research councils. The findings highlight how steering through funding decisions can multiply

Materials and technology for fabricating mechanical connectors by cold plastic deformation

Formulation of the problem. Choice of materials and technologies for fabrication mechanical attached fittings (MAF) performed by cold plastic deformation. Method. Theoretical analysis based on mechanical properties fitting and tubing materials. Springback tubing materials shall exceed springback tubing materials. Results. Describes recommendations for materials of contact connections, formed with various methods of plastic deformation.

Managing Ambiguities at the Edge of Knowledge

Many research-intensive universities have moved into the business of promoting technology development that promises revenue, impact, and legitimacy. While the scholarship on academic capitalism has documented the general dynamics of this institutional shift, we know less about the ground-level challenges of research priority and scientific problem choice. This paper unites the practice tradition in science and technology studies with an organizational analysis of decision-making to compare how two university artificial intelligence labs manage ambiguities at the edge of scientific knowledge. One lab focuses on garnering funding through commercialization schemes, while the other is oriented to federal science agencies. The ethnographic comparison identifies the mechanisms through which an industry-oriented lab can be highly adventurous yet produce a research program that is thin and erratic due to a priority placed on commercialization. However, the comparison does not yield an implicit nostalgia for federalized science; it reveals the mechanisms through which agency-oriented labs can pursue a thick and consistent research portfolio but in a strikingly myopic fashion.

The Power of Problem Choice

Fourth- and fifth-grade learners can use differentiated number sets within CGI problem structures to add and subtract fractions with unlike denominators.