1 . Researchers at the University of Sussex, Imperial College London and Nanyang Technological University in Singapore have for the first time used game theory (博弈论) to allow robots to assist humans safely and variously.

The research team used adaptive control (自适应控制) and Nash equilibrium (纳什均衡) to program a robot that can understand its human users’ behavior in order to better foresee their movements and respond to them. The researchers believe the breakthrough could make robots help humans do things better in many areas, such as sport training, body recovery or shared driving.

Lead author Dr Yanan Li, Lecturer in Control Engineering at the University of Sussex, said, “It is still very early days in the development of robots and at present, those robots for work are not intuitive enough to work closely and safely with human users. By allowing the robot to identify human users’ behavior and make use of game theory to let the robot react to them in the best way, we have developed a system where robots can work along with humans as humans do.”

To successfully apply game theory to the interaction of a robot and its human users, the researchers had to overcome the problem that the robot cannot know the humans’ intentions. The researchers thus had to develop a method allowing the robot to identify the human partner while safely and efficiently interacting with their motion.

The reactive robotic programming system allows a robot to continuously learn the human users’ control and adapt its own control accordingly. The robot is able to understand the human users’ action and then respond to it and help them to perform tasks successfully with minimal effort.

Professor Etienne Burdet, senior author of the paper, added: “Game theory has had important influences on economics during the last century and lead to several Nobel prizes.”

2 . The world has faced a food crisis of unprecedented(前所未有的) proportions in 2022—the largest in modern history, as conflict, the COVID-19 pandemic, climate crisis and rising costs have combined to pose great risks for hungry people across the world. As many as 828 million people go to bed hungry every night. The number of those facing acute food insecurity has risen from 135 million to 345 million since 2019. A total of 49 million people in 49 countries are suffering hunger, according to figures from the United Nations’ World Food Programme.

“We are facing an unprecedented global food crisis and all signs suggest we have not yet seen the worst. For the last three years, hunger numbers have repeatedly hit new peaks,” WFP Executive Director David Beasley said. He warned that things can and will get worse unless there is a large-scale and coordinated(协调一致的) effort to address the causes of this crisis.

There are many reasons for prevailing high levels of food insecurity. These reasons include conflicts, climate changes and weather extremes, economic slowdowns and downturns. In addition, these drivers often do not act alone. For instance, conflicts are often accompanied by economic downturns, which affect livelihoods and the ability of people to earn resources, leading to increasing poverty levels and higher prevalence(流行) of food insecurity.

Unfortunately, the main reasons for high levels of food insecurity have not improved this year. People in the Horn of Africa are facing a fifth consecutive(连续的) failed rain season in parts of Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia, which will constrain their production, and is likely to push many people deeper into food insecurity.

Moreover, there is uncertainty about the weather. And climatic shock affecting any major producer or exporter will introduce additional uncertainty into production and consequently prices, which in turn impact the ability to purchase food, particularly of the most vulnerable people.

3 . A good gift is one that is more valuable for the recipient than it is for the giver. But most gifts destroy value rather than create it. Think of the Christmas-tree-shaped cookie jar that cost your aunt 530 but is worth considerably less than zero to you, posing a moral conundrum (难题): Do you throw it right into the trash or wait a couple of months? The economist Joel Waldfogel calls this discrepancy the “deadweight loss” of gifts, and estimates that, on average, it is from 10 percent to a third of a gift’s price.

One explanation for the deadweight loss is a mismatch between desirability and feasibility. Consider n gadget that is useful (high disability) but difficult to set up and time-consuming to use (low feasibility). Scholars have found that givers usually focus on desirability, and receivers are more aware of feasibility. Your friend who bought you a fancy wearable fitness tracker probably thought it was a really cool and helpful gift; to you, it seems like a massive headache to figure out, requires an app download and a monthly fee, and offers data that will either make you feel terrible about yourself or turn into a life-ruining obsession. That’s why it is still sitting in your drawer in its original package.

Another happiness-killing mismatch can occur between the receiver’s initial reaction and their long-term satisfaction. As Anna Goldfarb noted in The Atlantic a few weeks ago, givers tend to look for “reaction-maximizing gifts” (such as the wife’s over-the-top response to the car) as opposed to “satisfaction-maximizing gifts.” Once the giver is not present to see the receiver’s reaction, the receiver might not actually be that excited about socks with her best friend’s face on them.

Someone looking for a big reaction might be tempted to buy a wildly expensive gift, which poses its own emotional problems. In the worst cases, they may even be trying to exert dominance over you, or manipulate you into doing them a favor later. Either way, receiving a gift that’s too nice might make you feel guilty. According to one 2019 survey from CompareCards, 46 percent of respondents felt guilty for being unable to give a gift worth as much as the one they received.

In truth, the biggest benefit to most gift giving is to the giver herself. Generosity is truly a way to buy happiness. As my colleague Michael Norton and his co-authors showed in the journal Science in 2008, although spending money on oneself is weakly related to happiness, spending money on others significantly rises the giver’s well-being. Neuroscientists have shown that charitable giving to others engages the reward system, inducing pleasure in one of the same ways that alcohol and certain drugs do. (Maybe this is the real reason Santa is so jolly.)

4 . With climate change continuing to worsen, our situation is beginning to feel increasingly serious.     1     Is it right? Maybe not.

Techno-optimism is one of the greatest misconceptions when it comes to solutions to ensure our future. It can be defined as a belief that future technologies will solve all of our current problems. This definition reinforces (强化) the idea that there’s no reason to panic or change our current energy-intensive lifestyle. All society needs to do is look to green technology to work its magic.     2    

One of the best examples of this optimistic misconception is the electric car. Despite being highly regarded as an eco-friendly way to get around, electric cars are not the end for the future of transport. Batteries in electric cars use chemical elements which we could be seeing a shortage of by the midcentury.     3     Techno-optimism has led many to believe that if everyone just switched to driving electric vehicles, we would be making incredible steps towards sustainability. However, the reality is that the amount of resources and energy needed to produce enough electric vehicles for everyone is not even remotely sustainable.

    4     Investing in public transportation and moving away from individually owned vehicles. Producing fewer cars. Improving recycling practices of old batteries. The solutions we seek should not be rooted in new technology, but be about changing the way our society functions.

Techno-optimism puts too much emphasis on technology and not enough on what we can do right this minute. Unfortunately, people seem to like the picture that techno-optimism paints.     5     It is important to understand that the problem begins when we see those technologies as a way to make our current lifestyles eco-friendly. Until we are ready to face the need for a less complex life, we cannot make true progress towards sustainability.

5 . Arguably, the biggest science development of the year to date has been the images of the very depths of the universe taken by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). Those images beg a comparison between the external and internal universes that science is bent on observing and understanding.

Decades ago, astrophysicist Carl Sagan famously said, “The universe is also within is. We’re made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself. ” He was commenting then on the reality that our internal universe was as complex and as fantastic as the outer space.

There are many similarities between the progress we’ve made in understanding the universe and in piecing together life’s inner workings. Like the technological developments that took us from Galileo’s telescope to the Hubble to the JWST, life science tools have also improved rapidly. From early light microscopes to modern super-resolution ones, these developments have afforded researchers a deep look into biology’s infinitesimal (无限小的) landscape. Learning that living things were composed of cells was, not a terribly long time ago, a revolutionary observation. Since then, scientists have been able to dive ever deeper into the components of life.

Going beyond merely observing the complicated makeup of organisms, life scientists can now discover the workings of molecules (分子). And that is where scanning the universe differs from peering into biology. Understanding the universe, especially from a functional standpoint, is not necessarily an immediate urgency. Understanding biology on that level is. Simply observing the amazing internal structure of cells is not enough. Biologists must also characterize how all those parts interact and change in different environments and when faced with various challenges. Being able to image a virus or bacterium is nice at the level of basic science. But knowing how viruses gain entry into cells and spread, infect, and disable can literally save lives. Through time, biology has risen to this mechanistic challenge. Not only can life science tools produce images of cell components, even more importantly, they can help predict the effects of drugs on receptors, of immune cells on foreign invaders (入侵者), and of genetic perturbations (基因干扰) on development and aging.

This is not to belittle the work of scientists researching into universe. They should rightly be praised for delivering views of impossibly distant, impossibly massive phenomena. My aim is to celebrate these accomplishments while at the same time recognizing that science’s inward search for detail and insight is equally impressive and, in my view, more urgent. The output of both the outward and inward explorations should stimulate wonder in everyone. After all, it’s all star-stuff.

7 . While many local teens spent their summers playing by the pool, Shea Frenyea-Provost brought her talents to life, leaving a lasting memory for years to come.

After five weeks, the 15-year-old’s artwork is now on show in People’s Park for all to see as the Village of Dannemora’s first outdoor mural(壁画)-symbolic of the ongoing efforts to give new energy to the village and all it has to offer.

For the young artist，the project took her out of the comfort zone(舒适区)-going from colored pencils and sketchbooks(素描本)to her first life-size mural- the first in what will now become a series of projects between the local teen and village.

With her mom active in the village’s growing Beautification Committee, Shea also got involved with volunteering. After seeing Shea’s sketches during the early stages of the mural planning, Tina Leduc, director of Beautification Committee, was awed by her talent and knew she was a perfect fit for the project.

With the help of her family, Shea was soon set up with her very own studio, where she spent weeks researching the Luna moth(蛾)，observing its outline and perfecting each final detail. “I used a projector(投影仪)to observe the moth for weeks and researched native plants in our area and the rest I really ended up doing freehand,“ Shea said, pointing to the fine lines of the climbing grape plants and moth antennas(触角).

For the Beautification Committee and villagers alike, her work has brought a welcomed new addition to the park while clearly showing her bright artistic future ahead. “She’s just such a natural,” said Leduc, who offered beginning guidance, otherwise leaving the creativity and design to the promising young artist. “I feel this is just the beginning for her. I know it is. We’re going to see so much from her.”