Journal publication
Selected manuscripts meeting NSRI editorial and scholarly standards
NSRI Journal + Archive
Original student research, reviewed and preserved in publicOpen access
NSRI Journal + Research Archive
Selected manuscripts meeting NSRI editorial and scholarly standards
Public records preserving student research from NSRI and other venues
Transparent evaluation of evidence, authorship, ethics, and research integrity
Selected journal publications
Higher-order data are often compressed into pairwise co-occurrence counts, but this can hide how pairs are assembled into triples. We ask for the largest possible difference in deterministic cascade size between simple 3-uniform hypergraphs with the same labeled exact pair-codegree matrix. Starting from two active vertices, a triple activates its third vertex when its other two are active. We define M₂(n) as the maximum closure-size gap inside any projection fiber on n vertices. A direct proof gives M₂(n)=0 for 2≤n≤5 and M₂(n)=n−3 for n≥6. The upper bound follows because equal codegrees force both cascades either to stop at two or reach at least three vertices. A five-edge Pasch-trade-plus-context construction attains the bound and extends to every larger n. Fresh exhaustive enumeration of all 2²⁰ simple 3-uniform hypergraphs on six labeled vertices independently checks the first ambiguous order, a maximum gap of three, and edge thresholds: four edges for different final sets, five for different sizes, and seven when non-isomorphism is additionally required on six vertices. Two separately implemented censuses agree on 69 shared summary fields. The result is a precise warning about information lost under pairwise compression for one abstract deterministic closure rule; it is not an empirical claim about real epidemics or social networks.
Background: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) affects at least half of people with diabetes and is a major risk factor for foot ulceration and amputation. Because nerve damage is least reversible late, a screening method's value depends on whether it can be delivered widely and early, not accuracy. Methods: This narrative review compared four DPN detection methods, nerve conduction studies, clinical sensory tests, plantar pressure analysis, and wearable gait sensing, across cost, setup, time, scalability, and accuracy. Results: Accuracy and scalability traded off. Nerve conduction studies are the accepted reference standard for large-fiber function but too specialist-dependent for population screening, while the cheapest test, the 10-gram monofilament, suits advanced disease better than early disease. Sensor-based methods report high accuracy from small, internally validated samples. Conclusion: No method is simultaneously cheap, fast, accurate, and sensitive to early disease. The unmet need is a scalable test externally validated for early detection.
Background. Off-exchange venues executed a record 51.8% of United States equity share volume in January 2025. A widely repeated interpretation attributes this migration to machine learning embedded in matching and routing infrastructure. This paper tests whether public data can support that attribution, and reports what they support instead.\n\nMethods. Six datasets were compiled from FINRA, SEC, and ESMA publications, from enforcement releases, and from the peer-reviewed and working-paper literature, and are provided in full with a calculation workbook in which every derived statistic is a live formula. A three-tier evidence protocol separates directly measured values from author-derived arithmetic and from interpretive attribution, and ten robustness tests are reported alongside the results they test.\n\nResults. In share terms, non-ATS off-exchange venues account for 86.3% of the 14.6 percentage-point rise in off-exchange share since 2019, a result robust to endpoint and window variation but not to dollar denomination, under which the figure falls to 54.1%. The 15.93 basis-point price-impact differential between retail and institutional execution indicates lower adverse selection in retail flow and is not, as it is often read, an execution penalty borne by retail investors. Sixteen enforcement actions totaling $330.15 million cluster in 2015 to 2018, and none alleges conduct involving a machine-learning system.\n\nConclusion. The public record establishes a compositional shift toward bilateral internalization, a segmented market, and a disclosure regime that has not been updated for model-driven venues. It does not establish that machine learning caused any of these. The governance question stands without the attribution, and a difference-in-differences design using audit-trail microdata is specified that would settle it.
Journal Publication
Journal Publication
Journal Publication
Journal Publication
Journal Publication
Journal Publication · Distinguished Article
Journal Publication
Journal Publication · Outstanding Article
Journal Publication
Journal Publication
Journal Publication · Distinguished Article
Journal Publication
Journal Publication · Distinguished Article
Journal Publication
Journal Publication
Journal Publication · Outstanding Article
Journal policies
NSRI may consider original research, review articles, methods reports, technical reports, research group outputs, selected commentary, NSRI archived submissions, and metadata records for student research completed through other venues where permissions allow. News and commentary are labeled separately from research articles.
Submissions may receive editorial screening, reviewer or editor feedback, revision requests, Research Archive placement, journal selection, or rejection. Work completed through another venue may be archived as a public record with original venue details.
Submissions are reviewed for clarity, evidence, citation quality, authorship, originality, ethics, safety, and fit with NSRI publication standards.
NSRI evaluates originality, authorship, rigor, ethics, safety, disclosures, AI use, privacy, and responsible handling of human subjects or sensitive data.
Public journal and archive records are intended to be openly accessible for reading and citation when accepted. Research Archive records may show metadata, abstracts where allowed, citation details, DOI, or a source link instead of duplicating full copyrighted text.
NSRI may update, correct, retract, or remove records when serious integrity, safety, authorship, or accuracy concerns are found after publication or archiving.