A Retiree & New Beginnings

Hey readers,

I write to you with a heavy heart... our team lost twice in the final round at the AZ Regional Science Bowl competition and earned 2nd place. After staying undefeated for the entirety of the tournament, we came up short against BASIS Mesa Team 1. We had a fun time and put in our best effort, but it's hard not to have regrets and wish certain questions went differently. Since we didn't move on to Nationals, my Science Bowl career is officially over -- what a wild 8 years it has been! So, in a final ode to Science Bowl, I wanted to thank all my teammates from this year and past years... I wouldn't be here today without you guys.

Yash-ip out... MUB MUB. :(

Ok... now back to my project. This next week is the final week officially at school for seniors, so we have reached the home-stretch for the Literature Review and Methods sections of the paper. I have been editing extremely carefully to clarify and trim all parts of my paper (entered the weekend with more clarifying than trimming, as I am now 800 words over the 3000 advised word limit). But, that's part of the grind. I will start by fixing the rest of my methods section, including adding the following figure to clearly display my samples more clearly and perhaps save some words.

Here's how I was thinking of showing my samples... let me know what you think!

My plan is to rewrite each section from start to finish today, so I can fix any other errors and remove extra words.

Regarding data collection, I have finished the simulation part of my experiments with the Rutherford Universal Manipulation Program (RUMP). RUMP is a really powerful program, as you can simulate the RBS spectra (basically the elemental composition that you receive) for various samples made up of layers. For instance, I can input a layer of blood (which is just the relative composition of blood's elements, so they sum up to 1) above a layer of Silicon or a microscope slide. Then, with a plot command, I can see what theory predicts our spectra should look like. I can then anticipate what sort of results we may get. However, the most insight often comes from comparing the theoretical prediction from the simulation with the experimental results. These are the reasons why I think it is definitely worth taking the time to simulate before we take our bulk measurements.

This week, I plan to finish analyzing and discussing the findings from my simulations with Dr. Herbots and finalize my Lit Review and Methods combination. Starting next week, since we have prepared all of the coating/substrate combinations, I should be on track to go into the lab 3 days per week and do the measurements with 3LCAA (to characterize the surface energy of the samples -- the A samples in the figure above) and then perform RBS on the blood samples (test uniformity with elemental composition -- the B samples). 

Such a strategy is slightly different than I originally planned, but as I stated last week, Dr. Herbots and I determined that doing many measurements at one time would be more feasible and introduce fewer confounding variables than taking lots of data over time. 

The data collection will be in 2 stages: (1) 3LCAA from Feb 5 - Feb 9 and (2) RBS from Feb 9 - Feb 19. This should be enough time to finish data collection by February 20th, as initially planned. 

Well, it's been a wild week, but that's going to be the norm from now on... I'm really excited to put my best product out there for the Lit Review/Methods and finally get back into the lab! 

Cheers,

Yash

(622)

"Where Ya At" - Future

"Your paper should be less comp bio and more co-biolog." When these words -- I like to call them revolutionary -- were uttered from Max's mouth with his trademark wink and smile, the other four of us in our group stared at each other in silence for a few seconds before we all cracked up.

Max is the Kanye of AP Research

This anecdote pretty much sums up our group's feedback from last week; we all got some amazing feedback (in the above case, Divya was told to connect her research to the biological implications more) and had fun doing it. The critiques were really helpful, as I got a chance to look at my mistakes and the mistakes of others critically and carefully, and our group's discussions were a really good break from solely working on my project (jk. never... too much HemaDrop = ain't enough HemaDrop). 

After meeting with Mrs. Haag, I'm refreshed, prepared, and ready to revamp my lit review and methods combo package. In case you were wondering, some issues I was encountering were detached claims from justifications, lack of credibility descriptions, and a bit of unclear/esoteric parts of both. I will be submitting both in the next 2 weeks.

Since my project involves wet-lab work, I have already begun implementing my methods. I have prepared the coatings of various dilutions, acquired the necessary substrates, and made the pairs of identical samples (one for characterization with 3LCAA, one for blood analysis). I've been really fortunate to be able to get a head-start on this step, so I am excited about that!

I'm as happy as Drizzy (featured in this blog in honor of our OChem rap video)

However, I am slightly "behind" on analyzing the samples with 3LCAA and RBS because I idealized the process in my schedule slightly and I am waiting on some safety forms at ASU. I have a specific plan for making these up, with the logic that I can perform all the analysis from 3LCAA and RBS in longer session rather than 1 sample at a time. This way, I can standardize my results by limiting potential confounding variables from doing tests and different days, and it is more convenient once I have the apparatus set up on one day. So, rather than measuring a few samples each day, once the third trimester starts, we can perform the experiments in larger chunks, which is nice. Additionally, I can prepare the apparatuses and try to prevent major obstacles for the days until then (including preparing the samples, etc.).

On the point of preparation, Dr. Herbots has always emphasized to me the importance of preparation before conducting an experiment, so I am excited to add that I have been conducting simulations as a way of preparing for the results I will get and establishing what theory predicts the results should be. By doing these simulations on a program called RUMP (Rutherford Universal Manipulation Program -- a program made in the 1980s with FORTRAN), I am preparing myself for the results and will have a good comparison for the experimental data.

Example RBS spectra from RUMP

So far so good, except for the change in schedule, which made it easier and more feasible. The simulations have been taking up a lot of my time,for a journal paper, so I'm excited to present that data in my project too, since I think it's really interesting to compare simulations to data from the lab (and write up some preliminary results)! So, that's where I'm at...

I'm really excited to start working in the lab 3 times per week and getting some results! Thank you so much to Mr.s Haag, Rema, Kimy, Max, and Divya for helping me edit my methods and literature review.

Here's to another week of great research (IMPLEMENTATION)!

Cheers,
Yash

(625)

We're Back! And Reflecting on My Methods

Hey readers!

Phew... it feels so good to be back. After over 1 month without blogging, we are now going to be consistently blogging every week as school comes to a close (!?), and we all go our separate ways to implement our methods.

Senior year encapsulated with a meme...

Right now, we have submitted a working version of the methods section that will appear in our final papers. Now, our job for last week and the next week was to divide up into groups and fix our mistakes (they were plentiful, but it's all part of the process).

Although I will be receiving feedback from my group on this upcoming Wednesday, I think writing about what I perceived as strong and weak in my methods beforehand will allow me to critique my own methods from the lessons I learned last week and go into the feedback session with the methods fresh in my mind. So without further ado... let's do this!

The first weakness of my methods is the limited credibility that I used. This limitation was a by-product of my methods section exceeding the word limit of 1,000 words; the places where I tried to cut was the credibility because many sources overlap from my literature review. However, from going over other methods and doing a bit of introspection, I realize that some parts of my methods section are not supported fully. I need to fix this by explaining the methodology of the source and expanding upon the credibility of the authors.

In order to do this, I will have to fix another weakness of my methods: its length. I am 587 words over the word limit. I think the best spot to cut words is towards the beginning when I explain the type of method I chose. Although I tried to make this part extremely clear, it could be shortened. In my group editing session, I will also try to ask for spots that are unclear, as this often correlates with verbosity. One potential way for me to shorten my methods would be to insert my sample matrix as a table instead of describing it in so much detail (so the reader can see it). Max had a similar situation with this instructions. Just a thought?

Finally, I would like to explain some of the technical terms in my methods in more detail and more thoroughly because I feel that they were slightly esoteric (major L) at some points. These include the concepts of 3LCAA and Rutherford Backscattering and the qualitative markers of dis-uniformity.

These weaknesses sum up the general trend of my methods -- needing to say more in less space. However, I am confident that with the help of my group and by looking over my methods even more carefully, I should be able to mitigate these problems. Another solution would involve chopping 200 words or so from my literature review, so my word count is still on track. I am very happy with the level of detail I could provide about my method including the various validity and ethical precautions (except I forgot to talk about the course -- RIP).

Identifying these weaknesses is the first step, and by working on my methods with my group, I am confident that I can make my methods more concise, more understandable, and better!

We are optimistic on this blog, and for good reason!

Here's to another great week --  I will keep y'all updated on my progress on my methods and implementing my research! 

Talk to you next week (for real)!

Cheers,

Yash

(593)

P.S. I tried to experiment with the formatting/layout (doesn't deserve to be called an aesthetic) of my blog. Let me know if you think it looks worse or better!