Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
How well-meaning parents sink their child's chances of college admission
"What's the number one parent behavior that will hurt a child's chance of admission?" The question was posed to Robert Alexander, the University of Rochester vice provost and dean of enrollment management, on the podcast "College Knowledge." He was quick to answer. "Parents needs to be empowering the student and not driving the conversation" when it comes to choosing a college and engaging with college admissions professionals, Alexander replied. He explained that too many parents have a narrow view of what they deem as "acceptable" institutions of higher education for their child. They come by it honestly, he said, with most of their knowledge derived from their own college searches and dreams a generation ago. They tend to home in on 20 or 30 schools when, in reality, the universe of quality colleges and universities has expanded exponentially since the days these parents were considering where to study, Alexander said. "Widening that lends and thinking beyond the 20 or 30 schools they know a lot about or think they know a lot about or see a lot of bumper stickers for, that's really important," Alexander said. "There are many more really great institutions and what's important is not your child getting into 'the best college' that they can, but instead their child finding the best fit at one or maybe a range of different institutions." Alexander is an expert in undergraduate admissions and enrollment management who speaks on the subjects to national audiences and whose work has been published in national publications. Click his profile to reach him.
#Expert Perspective: When AI Follows the Rules but Misses the Point
When a team of researchers asked an artificial intelligence system to design a railway network that minimized the risk of train collisions, the AI delivered a surprising solution: Halt all trains entirely. No motion, no crashes. A perfect safety record, technically speaking, but also a total failure of purpose. The system did exactly what it was told, not what was meant. This anecdote, while amusing on the surface, encapsulates a deeper issue confronting corporations, regulators, and courts: What happens when AI faithfully executes an objective but completely misjudges the broader context? In corporate finance and governance, where intentions, responsibilities, and human judgment underpin virtually every action, AI introduces a new kind of agency problem, one not grounded in selfishness, greed, or negligence, but in misalignment. From Human Intent to Machine Misalignment Traditionally, agency problems arise when an agent (say, a CEO or investment manager) pursues goals that deviate from those of the principal (like shareholders or clients). The law provides remedies: fiduciary duties, compensation incentives, oversight mechanisms, disclosure rules. These tools presume that the agent has motives—whether noble or self-serving—that can be influenced, deterred, or punished. But AI systems, especially those that make decisions autonomously, have no inherent intent, no self-interest in the traditional sense, and no capacity to feel gratification or remorse. They are designed to optimize, and they do, often with breathtaking speed, precision, and, occasionally, unintended consequences. This new configuration, where AI acting on behalf of a principal (still human!), gives rise to a contemporary agency dilemma. Known as the alignment problem, it describes situations in which AI follows its assigned objective to the letter but fails to appreciate the principal’s actual intent or broader values. The AI doesn’t resist instructions; it obeys them too well. It doesn’t “cheat,” but sometimes it wins in ways we wish it wouldn’t. When Obedience Becomes a Liability In corporate settings, such problems are more than philosophical. Imagine a firm deploying AI to execute stock buybacks based on a mix of market data, price signals, and sentiment analysis. The AI might identify ideal moments to repurchase shares, saving the company money and boosting share value. But in the process, it may mimic patterns that look indistinguishable from insider trading. Not because anyone programmed it to cheat, but because it found that those actions maximized returns under the constraints it was given. The firm may find itself facing regulatory scrutiny, public backlash, or unintended market disruption, again not because of any individual’s intent, but because the system exploited gaps in its design. This is particularly troubling in areas of law where intent is foundational. In securities regulation, fraud, market manipulation, and other violations typically require a showing of mental state: scienter, mens rea, or at least recklessness. Take spoofing, where an agent places bids or offers with the intent to cancel them to manipulate market prices or to create an illusion of liquidity. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, this is a crime if done with intent to deceive. But AI, especially those using reinforcement learning (RL), can arrive at similar strategies independently. In simulation studies, RL agents have learned that placing and quickly canceling orders can move prices in a favorable direction. They weren’t instructed to deceive; they simply learned that it worked. The Challenge of AI Accountability What makes this even more vexing is the opacity of modern AI systems. Many of them, especially deep learning models, operate as black boxes. Their decisions are statistically derived from vast quantities of data and millions of parameters, but they lack interpretable logic. When an AI system recommends laying off staff, reallocating capital, or delaying payments to suppliers, it may be impossible to trace precisely how it arrived at that recommendation, or whether it considered all factors. Traditional accountability tools—audits, testimony, discovery—are ill-suited to black box decision-making. In corporate governance, where transparency and justification are central to legitimacy, this raises the stakes. Executives, boards, and regulators are accustomed to probing not just what decision was made, but also why. Did the compensation plan reward long-term growth or short-term accounting games? Did the investment reflect prudent risk management or reckless speculation? These inquiries depend on narrative, evidence, and ultimately the ability to assign or deny responsibility. AI short-circuits that process by operating without human-like deliberation. The challenge isn’t just about finding someone to blame. It’s about whether we can design systems that embed accountability before things go wrong. One emerging approach is to shift from intent-based to outcome-based liability. If an AI system causes harm that could arise with certain probability, even without malicious design, the firm or developer might still be held responsible. This mirrors concepts from product liability law, where strict liability can attach regardless of intent if a product is unreasonably dangerous. In the AI context, such a framework would encourage companies to stress-test their models, simulate edge cases, and incorporate safety buffers, not unlike how banks test their balance sheets under hypothetical economic shocks. There is also a growing consensus that we need mandatory interpretability standards for certain high-stakes AI systems, including those used in corporate finance. Developers should be required to document reward functions, decision constraints, and training environments. These document trails would not only assist regulators and courts in assigning responsibility after the fact, but also enable internal compliance and risk teams to anticipate potential failures. Moreover, behavioral “stress tests” that are analogous to those used in financial regulation could be used to simulate how AI systems behave under varied scenarios, including those involving regulatory ambiguity or data anomalies. Smarter Systems Need Smarter Oversight Still, technical fixes alone will not suffice. Corporate governance must evolve toward hybrid decision-making models that blend AI’s analytical power with human judgment and ethical oversight. AI can flag risks, detect anomalies, and optimize processes, but it cannot weigh tradeoffs involving reputation, fairness, or long-term strategy. In moments of crisis or ambiguity, human intervention remains indispensable. For example, an AI agent might recommend renegotiating thousands of contracts to reduce costs during a recession. But only humans can assess whether such actions would erode long-term supplier relationships, trigger litigation, or harm the company’s brand. There’s also a need for clearer regulatory definitions to reduce ambiguity in how AI-driven behaviors are assessed. For example, what precisely constitutes spoofing when the actor is an algorithm with no subjective intent? How do we distinguish aggressive but legal arbitrage from manipulative behavior? If multiple AI systems, trained on similar data, converge on strategies that resemble collusion without ever “agreeing” or “coordination,” do antitrust laws apply? Policymakers face a delicate balance: Overly rigid rules may stifle innovation, while lax standards may open the door to abuse. One promising direction is to standardize governance practices across jurisdictions and sectors, especially where AI deployment crosses borders. A global AI system could affect markets in dozens of countries simultaneously. Without coordination, firms will gravitate toward jurisdictions with the least oversight, creating a regulatory race to the bottom. Several international efforts are already underway to address this. The 2025 International Scientific Report on the Safety of Advanced AI called for harmonized rules around interpretability, accountability, and human oversight in critical applications. While much work remains, such frameworks represent an important step toward embedding legal responsibility into the design and deployment of AI systems. The future of corporate governance will depend not just on aligning incentives, but also on aligning machines with human values. That means redesigning contracts, liability frameworks, and oversight mechanisms to reflect this new reality. And above all, it means accepting that doing exactly what we say is not always the same as doing what we mean Looking to know more or connect with Wei Jiang, Goizueta Business School’s vice dean for faculty and research and Charles Howard Candler Professor of Finance. Simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview or time to talk today.
How to respond when your teen rebels
Why do some rebellious teenagers shun parental warnings about their behavior while others take them to heart? University of Rochester psychologist Judith Smetana has devoted her career to unpacking that question. Her research reveals that parents who live out their values — and take the time to understand the perspective of their teenagers — have the most success at positively shaping adolescent behavior. Smetana’s latest study, published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, shows that when parents “walk the walk” and model their values consistently, teens perceive rules and warnings as supportive guidance rather than controlling commands. But that alone won’t stop all risky teenage behavior. What really works, Smetana’s research finds, is “perspective-taking”: when parents try to understand their child’s feelings and the reasons for them. Smetana is widely cited for her expertise on moral development, autonomy, and parent-teen conflict — and how these dynamics shape young people’s lives. Connect with her by clicking on her profile.
#ExpertSpotlight: The Day That Redefined America: 9/11 and Its Lasting Impact
September 11, 2001 marked a pivot in American history—a day when the nation’s sense of safety was shattered, and its collective identity reshaped. The attacks triggered sweeping changes in security, government authority, social behavior, and even cultural cohesion. Today, the legacy of 9/11 lives on in how we remember, govern, and connect. A Nation in Shock—and Unity On that fall morning, the U.S. witnessed a tragedy that killed nearly 3,000 people and devastated the nation’s psyche. In the immediate aftermath, grief turned into solidarity—as most Americans tuned into televised coverage, felt sadness, anger, and fear, yet paradoxically came together in an extraordinary show of patriotism and trust in institutions. In the months that followed, confidence in government reached levels unseen in decades—fueled by mourning, resolve, and a collective desire to heal. The Rise of “Homeland Security” & Executive Power Almost immediately, the U.S. government unleashed legal and structural transformations. The USA PATRIOT Act, passed just weeks later in October 2001, significantly expanded surveillance and law enforcement powers for domestic security—raising ongoing concerns about civil liberties. Alongside this, the Department of Homeland Security was created in 2002, bringing together 22 agencies to coordinate security against future threats and reinforcing a new era of national vigilance. Economic Shock and Air Travel Overhaul The attacks triggered immediate economic consequences: U.S. stock markets plunged, airlines and insurers suffered heavy losses, and GDP forecasts were revised downward. Meanwhile, the aviation sector underwent a rapid and lasting modernization in security protocols and flight routing. Notably, Canada’s Operation Yellow Ribbon absorbed diverted flights in the chaos, highlighting international cooperation amid crisis. Legal Precedents and Global Conflict Congress quickly approved the broad-ranging Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), enabling the U.S. to pursue adversaries globally—a mandate that has since been interpreted far beyond its original context, shaping nearly two decades of “forever wars.” These legal expansions—and the accompanying conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq—signaled a new global posture that redefined American foreign policy. Remembering, Serving, and the Legacy Continues In the years since, public memory of 9/11 has evolved—from solemn remembrance to proactive service. Patriot Day, proclaimed a national day of mourning and service, now encourages millions of Americans each year to volunteer in honor of those lost and the unity felt afterward. These acts of service continue to reflect the enduring spirit of resilience and community. Connect with our experts on the history, significance, and lasting impact of 9/11 on American life and policy. Check out our experts here : www.expertfile.com
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here. The last few weeks of summer, heading into Labor Day weekend, can sometimes mean vacations and driving more miles on the road for all people, including teens. Traffic crashes are the No. 1 cause of death for teens, and the crash rate for teen drivers is disproportionately higher than the share of licensed teen drivers. In addition to this grim statistic, summer is the riskiest time for teen drivers. The 100 deadliest days represent the period from Memorial Day to Labor Day when the number of fatal crashes involving teen drivers dramatically increases. A third of each year’s teen driver crashes occur during the summer. We are scholars who research transportation safety and teen driver behavior. Our expertise helps us understand that these 100 days are not just a statistical fluke – they reflect a dangerous intersection of factors such as inexperience and a propensity to take risks. What makes summer different? Regardless of the season, some teen drivers engage in risky behaviors that increase their likelihood of a fatal crash, such as getting distracted, driving with friends in the vehicle, driving under the influence, not wearing seat belts and a lack of hazard awareness. Teens also have more free time in the summer, since most aren’t in school. Combined with the longer days and better weather, teens drive more over the summer. More time on the road means more risk, especially for inexperienced drivers. Teens may also be more likely to drive after dark during the summer, in comparison to more experienced drivers. But nighttime driving is also when visibility is reduced and crash risks are higher, particularly for teens who haven’t fully developed the skills necessary for night driving. This increased exposure, in addition to teens’ general risky driving tendencies, contributes to the 100 deadliest days for teen drivers. The increased crash risk for teens over the summer isn’t equally distributed either. Crashes with teen drivers that lead to serious injuries are more likely to occur with male drivers, in rural areas, for those of lower socioeconomic status and for those with disorders, such as attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder. Teaching young drivers Driver’s education programs are the formal method to teach teen drivers the rules of the road. In driver’s education programs, teens receive information about driver and road safety though classroom and behind-the-wheel instruction in preparation for the licensing exam. Some states require teens to complete a driver’s education course if they want to receive a license under the age of 18. Of teens who have a license, nearly 80% of them have gone through some form of driver’s education. Though driver’s education programs can be helpful, their effects are not equally felt. In some states, teens and their guardians must pay out of pocket for driver’s education courses to obtain a license. This makes driver’s education and, as a consequence, obtaining a driver’s license inequitable. There are also driving school deserts – areas where the poverty rate is 20% or above and there are no behind-the-wheel driver education courses within a 10- to 15-minute drive. This makes driver education courses inaccessible. Many of these driving school deserts happen to be in areas with high populations of minorities. Over 20 years ago, graduated driver licensing was introduced to reduce teen crash rates. This is a phased licensing system wherein teen drivers are restricted in terms of when, where and with whom they can drive until they turn 18. Such a system allows teens to gradually learn and gain experience with driving over time. Graduated driver licensing has been implemented in all 50 states, and it has been shown to reduce teen driver crash rates. However, its effectiveness is limited to those who participate in the system. A large number of teens are unlicensed and are of low socioeconomic status. Many of these unlicensed teens forgo the entire process and remain unlicensed but still drive, well into their 20s when the graduated driver licensing restrictions are lifted. Making summer safer There are two things people can do to turn the 100 deadliest days into the 100 safest days. First, it is important that communities offer free supplementary training programs for teen drivers, because becoming a safe and responsible teen driver shouldn’t be limited to those with resources. As one example, in collaboration with industry partners, we have developed a program called Risk-ATTEND. It is a free, online, evidence-based program that teaches teen drivers how to anticipate risks while driving. Our research has shown that programs such as these can improve teen driving skills and may be especially effective for teen drivers in high-poverty areas. Second, our research has shown that parents and guardians still play an important role in influencing teen driver behavior. Studies show that teens mirror the behaviors they observe: If they see adults text and drive, they’re more likely to do the same. Once teenagers become old enough to drive, it is also important to establish rules and guidelines about expectations to establish clarity and accountability. Written agreements or checklists can address high-risk conditions such as nighttime driving, driving with other young passengers, phone use and adherence to speed limits. Systems to help monitor and enforce rules have been shown to be effective in improving teen driver behavior. One such program is Checkpoints, which is a Connecticut-based program in which families agree to limit teen driving during high-risk conditions. Teens face consequences for violating these limits, such as a temporary loss of driving privileges. However, the limits are gradually lifted as they gain driving experience. More than rules matter Ultimately, preventing crashes in the summer and beyond extends beyond mere adherence to regulations. Avoiding them fundamentally hinges on cultivating a robust safety culture that emphasizes a collective commitment to risk reduction and continuous improvement in driving practices. For teens, the summer months present unique challenges and opportunities. Drawing on best practices, such as training programs, teens can build essential skills in varied conditions before gaining full, unsupervised privileges.
Breaking: Justin Timberlake Reveals He Has Lyme Disease
When a major celebrity opens up about a personal health struggle, public attention often follows. That’s certainly the case after Justin Timberlake recently revealed that he is battling Lyme disease—a condition that affects nearly half a million Americans each year but remains widely misunderstood. Timberlake’s announcement is bringing renewed focus to the causes, risks, and complexities of Lyme disease, including how it spreads, where it’s most prevalent, and what individuals can do to protect themselves. With tick season still active in many regions, this moment offers an opportunity to better inform the public—and we’ve identified a group of leading experts who can help do just that. From microbiologists and epidemiologists to entomologists and disease ecologists, the following researchers bring a wide range of expertise on Lyme disease, tick biology, and environmental risk factors. Whether you're a journalist looking for credible sources, a public health communicator, or simply someone trying to make sense of this rising threat, these experts are available to provide clarity and context in the wake of this headline-making health disclosure. Featured Experts A highly media‑quoted microbiologist specializing in Lyme and other tick‑borne diseases. He runs TickReport, a service that tests ticks and interprets exposure risks. Insights on... How celebrities like Timberlake amplifying Lyme awareness may shift public perception and testing demand. The relevance of tick season timing and geographic risk zones. How tick testing works and what patients should know post‑exposure. Over two decades studying Borrelia burgdorferi and blacklegged ticks, with strong expertise in disease ecology and conservation medicine. Insights on... The biology of transmission and the tick’s life cycle—what leads to infection risk. How habitat and ecological shifts may affect Lyme exposure risks. Wildlife‑human disease interface in increasingly peri‑urban settings. Focuses on landscape ecology and patterns of vector‑borne disease emergence including Lyme disease. Insights on... How environmental changes (e.g. urban sprawl, climate trends) are altering Lyme disease risk maps. Predictive models: where Lyme is emerging next. Implications for public health messaging given high-profile cases like Timberlake’s. Specializes in tick taxonomy and vector species genetics—ideal for deeper background on tick diversity and distribution. Insights on... Which tick species carry Lyme and how misidentification can confuse diagnosis. Emerging tick species or genetic strains and what they mean for prevention. Geographic spread and species shift over time. His research examines geographic patterns of Lyme disease, including why incidence varies regionally in the U.S. Insights on... Why Lyme is more prevalent in certain states—even those outside Timberlake’s or his fans’ travel zones. Human behavioral and habitat factors (e.g. suburban greenspace vs. deep woods). What seasonal changes in tick behavior tell us about infection risk. Story Angles to Explore Celebrity spotlight on Lyme disease: How high‑profile cases can impact media attention, funding, public awareness, and testing demand. Diagnosis and prevention: From exposure to testing (e.g., TickReport), early symptoms, treatment windows, and what experts recommend post‑bite. Ecology and environment: Why Lyme is expanding geographically, and how climate and land‑use change influence risk. Tick evolution and identification: Educating the public on which ticks transmit Lyme, emerging strains, and challenges in correct tick identification. Regional variation in risk: Breakdowns of why some states or regions are Lyme hotspots and how that aligns with the celebrity’s likely exposure zones or fan geography. Looking for more Experts? Visit www.expertfile.com or download ExpertFile for your phone.
What Sydney Sweeney’s American Eagle ad reveals about beauty standards and cultural expectations
Sydney Sweeney’s latest American Eagle campaign is doing more than selling denim – it’s stirring up a heated cultural conversation. Jaehee Jung, professor of fashion and apparel studies at the University of Delaware, can discuss the ways in which this reaction says a lot about where we are as a society. A leading expert on fashion, body image and consumer behavior, Jung studies how the fashion industry shapes – and is shaped by – our expectations of beauty, identity and representation. The ad in question features Sweeney in relaxed, casual pieces aligned with American Eagle’s classic aesthetic. But online reaction has been anything but chill. While many fans praised the actress’s style and confidence, others criticized the campaign for promoting unrealistic beauty standards and lacking diverse representation. Some even called it “pro-eugenics” – an extreme accusation that points to just how charged the conversation has become. With a background in both psychological and cultural aspects of fashion, Jung is available to discuss why this campaign struck such a nerve — and what it means for the future of women’s fashion and branding. To speak with Professor Jung, visit her ExpertFile profile or contact mediarelations@udel.edu.
Taming "The Bear": Villanova Professor Examines Workplace Toxicity in FX's Acclaimed Series
In the latest season of FX’s award-winning series “The Bear,” lead character and chef Carmen “Carmy” Berzatto finds himself at a crossroads. A culinary genius, Carmy has successfully overseen the reinvention of his family’s Italian beef shop as a high-end restaurant—shepherding a dedicated, if unpolished, crew of sandwich makers into a world of haute cuisine, fine wine and elevated service. However, over the course of this transition, his exacting standards have contributed to a culture of anxiety, dysfunction and resentment in the workplace. Despite staff members’ professional and personal growth, tempers still flare like burners on a range, with Carmy’s obsessive attention to detail and single-minded pursuit of perfection spurring conflict. By season’s end, grappling with the fallout from a mixed review seemingly influenced by the back-of-house “chaos,” the chef is forced to confront a complicated and thorny question: Am I getting in the way of my own restaurant’s success? Carmy’s dilemma, while fictional, reflects the very real challenges many modern businesses face when excellence is prioritized at the expense of psychological safety and workplace harmony. Per Manuela Priesemuth, PhD, who researches toxic work climates, aggression on the job and organizational fairness, the warning signs are all too frequently overlooked in high-pressure environments like restaurants. “Some high-stakes industries have a characteristic of having toxic behavior more accepted,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “When it’s more accepted or normed, it’s a real problem.” As she explains, workers in the food service industry, much like medical professionals in an operating room or military personnel in a combat zone, have a tendency to view measured communication and thoughtful interaction as a luxury or even, in some cases, a hindrance. Essentially, there’s a common misconception that working with an edge—yelling orders, avoiding dialogue and berating “underperformers”—gets the job done. “In all of these high-stakes environments where it’s thought there’s leeway to talk negatively or disparagingly, people are mistaken in the productivity result,” Dr. Priesemuth says. “It actually changes for the better in positive climates, because people who are treated with dignity and respect are better performers than those who are mistreated.” To Dr. Priesemuth’s point, research increasingly shows that workplace culture, not just talent or technical ability, is an essential driver of organizational success. In an environment like Carmy’s kitchen, where pride and passion often give way to personal attacks and shouting matches, the on-the-job dynamic can effectively undermine productivity. What may begin as an intended push for excellence can instead result in burnout, high turnover and weakened trust—outcomes that are especially problematic in collaborative, fast-paced industries like hospitality. “There’s even evidence that abusive behavior in restaurant settings can lead to food loss,” shares Dr. Priesemuth. “So, there is a sort of retaliation from the employees who are going through this experience, whether it’s measured [in profit margins] or impact on the customer.” In order to prevent these less-than-ideal outcomes, businesses should take steps proactively, says Dr. Priesemuth. More specifically, they should clearly articulate their values and expectations, considerately engage with their staff’s opinions and concerns and consistently invest in their employees’ growth and development. In the world of “The Bear,” a few of Carmy’s managerial decisions in the second season could be seen as moves in the right direction. At that juncture, he was leveraging his industry connections to provide his restaurant’s staff with the tools and training necessary to thrive in Chicago’s fine dining scene, building skills, confidence and goodwill. “If you give people voice—such as input on the menu, for example, or more autonomy in completing a certain task—it boosts morale,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “It helps people feel that they have input and that they are valued members of the team; it’s this sort of collaborative, positive relationship that increases commitment and performance.” Establishing this type of work culture, grounded in open communication, mutual respect and a shared sense of mission, takes concerted effort and constant maintenance. In situations in which toxicity has already become an issue, as it has in Carmy’s kitchen, the task becomes decidedly more difficult. Typically, it demands a long-term commitment to organizational change at the business’ highest levels. “Adjusting the tone at the top really matters,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “So, if the owner were to treat their chefs and waiters with the dignity and respect that they deserve as workers, that also trickles down to, for example, the customer.” A leader’s influence on workplace morale, she contends, is nuanced and far-reaching. When those in charge model a lack of empathy or emotional distance, for instance, a sort of toxicity can take root. Likewise, when they repeatedly show anger, animosity or frustration, those same feelings and attitudes can have an ingrained effect—regardless of a staff’s talent or ability. Given the outsized role owners, supervisors and managers play in shaping organizational culture, Dr. Priesemuth further notes, “Leaders must also feel that they’re being supported. You can’t have someone who’s exhausted, works 80 hours a week and has relationship and money issues and expect them to say, ‘What are your problems? What do you need?’” In many ways, her insights speak directly to the struggles Carmy faces and prompts throughout “The Bear’s” run. At every turn, he’s dogged by family and relationship troubles, mounting financial pressures and unresolved trauma from a past role. Ultimately, as would happen in real life, his difficulty in healthily processing and addressing these issues doesn’t just harm him; it affects his staff, manifesting itself as a need for control and a crusade for perfection. “There are spillover effects from your own personal life into your job role. In the management field, that has become increasingly clear,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “Whatever you’re going through, whether it’s from an old job or something personal, it will automatically spill over into your current work life and your interactions. And, vice versa, what’s happening to you at work will [impact you off the clock].” In dramatic fashion, the fourth season of “The Bear” concludes with Carmy acknowledging as much. Determining that there are other aspects of his life desperately in need of attention, he surrenders the reins of his business to chef de cuisine Sydney “Syd” Adamu and maître d’hôtel Richard “Richie” Jerimovich, appointing them part-owners. While the soundness of this decision remains a subject for the show’s next season, Carmy justifies the move with a blunt admission: “It’s the best thing for the restaurant. We have to put the restaurant first… I don’t have anything to pull from.” In the end, in both “The Bear” and management studies, there’s an understanding that building healthy and productive work environments requires active engagement and positive reinforcement on the part of leadership. In a sense, creating a strong work culture is shown to be a lot like preparing a phenomenal meal; it’s a matter of attentiveness, patience and care. Without those ingredients, the result could very well be a recipe for disaster.
Neutrons by the trillions: Using computational physics to understand nuclear reactors
Zeyun Wu, Ph.D., associate professor in the mechanical and nuclear engineering department at VCU Engineering, is reshaping the future of nuclear power. Nuclear reactors are among the most complex engineered systems on earth, with different physical processes interacting simultaneously across various scales. Even the world's most powerful computers cannot simulate every detail of an operating reactor at once. With a background in computational reactor physics, Wu’s research develops modeling and simulation techniques crucial to understanding next-generation nuclear reactors. By creating these advanced tools, his research eliminates the need for costly physical experimentation while ensuring the safety, efficiency and environmental sustainability of future nuclear power plants. Wu's research focuses on understanding reactor behavior through two aspects: multi-physics and multi-scale modeling. The multi-physics approach integrates various physical phenomena, such as nuclear physics reactions, fluid dynamics, heat transfer and structural mechanics, into a unified simulation framework. The multi-scale modeling technique addresses the vast range of physical scales involved, from subatomic neutron interactions to meter-sized reactor components. Wu’s research can simulate the complex phenomena within reactors at different scales. These models, developed using advanced numerical methods, help predict reactor behavior under various conditions. One of the models Wu uses tracks neutron behavior, a fundamental aspect to understand nuclear reactions. His simulations track trillions of neutrons as they move through various reactor materials, cause fission events and generate power. "What drives power is actually the neutron," explained Wu. "Once an atom splits, along with the nuclear energy release, lots of neutrons come out. We're talking about 1012 to 1013 neutrons per second. Our code tracks each neutron to understand where it comes from and where it goes." By understanding neutron distribution across space, time and energy domains, Wu's team can predict power distribution throughout the reactor core. This helps identify potential hotspots – areas of heightened thermal activity that could pose safety challenges. Beyond neutron behavior, Wu's research also explores how cooling fluids interact with neutrons and carry away thermal energy, a field known as thermal hydraulics, because how the reactor components are cooled significantly affects the neutron behavior as well. This also explains why the multi-physics modeling becomes essential for nuclear reactor simulations. Wu founded the Computational Applied Reactor Physics Laboratory (CARPL) to continue his research in nuclear reactor modeling and simulation. Undergraduate and master’s students learn to use established nuclear simulation codes to analyze reactor problems – skills highly valued in the industry and national labs. Ph.D. students build on theoretical foundations to deepen their understanding, enhance existing models, and develop new ones. “My area of research has been continually evolving for the past 60 years or so,” said Wu. “Most of the codes we use have been developed by national labs, like Oak Ridge National Lab, but these codes aren’t perfect. National labs hire Ph.D. level students with this niche to identify deficits in the code, correct errors and even add new functions and improve them.” Looking forward, Wu hopes his research will have a real-world impact on the upcoming shift in nuclear power in America. Over the next 20 to 30 years, the nation's approximately 90 light-water-cooled nuclear reactors reach the end of their operational lifetimes. Light water refers to ordinary water (H₂O), used in most existing reactors to both cool the system and slow down neutrons to sustain the nuclear reaction. To replace them, experts are looking toward advanced, non-light-water-cooled reactors, such as the Molten Uranium Breeder Reactor (MUBR) shown in the figure. Computational methods and tools like Wu’s research lab developed will be essential to their development and implementation. Non-light-water cooled reactors offer significant advantages over the older designs. Some can operate at higher temperatures while others produce substantially less nuclear waste, addressing one of the industry's persistent challenges. "Unlike traditional water reactors, where we have decades of operational experience and established analysis tools, these new designs present unique challenges," explained Wu. "Companies like Dominion employ large teams of analysts who use well-tested computational tools to maintain their existing reactors, but those same tools aren't calibrated for these next-generation reactors. Our research is developing the computational methods and simulations these advanced reactors will need. When these new reactors come online, the methodologies we're creating now can be quickly converted into production-level nuclear codes, providing immediate practical value to industry.”
The Asian Needle Ant (Brachyponera chinensis) Found in Southern Louisiana
In Louisiana, there are several ant species that are capable of stinging besides the red imported fire ant (Solenopsis invicta), such as the elongate twig ant (Pseudomyrmex gracilis), Comanche harvester ant (Pogonomyrmex comanche) and several species in the subfamily Ponerinae. The Asian needle ant (ANA) (Brachyponera chinensis) joins the list and has been confirmed in the state. Recent reports on the Asian needle ant by Mississippi State University extension entomologist, Santos J. Portugal and other urban entomologists in the region spurred the authors at Louisiana State University to investigate the presence of ANA in their state. By happenstance, two citizen scientists had reported sightings of the ant on iNaturalist at two Louisiana parks in August 2024 and June 2025. Therefore, on June 17, 2025, an LSU entomologist visited one of the parks to ground-truth the citing by collecting the ant, as he had prior experience with it. The Asian needle ant is a termite specialist, preferentially feeding on them, often living in close proximity with termite colonies and inside damp wood. To collect the ants, water-soaked wood was located in a forested area, broken open, revealing ANA, and they did not react aggressively to the disturbance. The ants immediately grabbed immature larva and retreated into crevices, not bothering the collectors at all. Upon retrieval, an LSU entomologist used a microscope at 40x to 60x magnification and the dichotomous key authored by MacGown (2003) to confirm that the collected specimens were ANA. It is important to verify the identity of invasive species submitted on citizen scientist projects as the images may not be of sufficient quality to get a positive identification. The ANA was discovered in the U.S. in 1934 while individuals were researching Argentine ants (Linepithema humile). Since the introduction of the ANA, it has spread to many states within the U.S., ranging from Wisconsin to Texas to the east coast. ANAs are medium sized (about 5 mm long) and slender. The species originated from Asia. Queens are slightly larger (6.5 mm) and look similar in appearance to workers. ANAs are black to dark brown in coloration, with light brown legs, mandibles and antennae. To distinguish the ant from other look-alikes, ANA has a large single petiole node that extends above the thorax or alitrunk, and a shiny mesopluron on the side of the thorax. ANA colonies are typically small in numbers, up to a few thousand individuals in large colonies. They are polygynous, meaning they have multiple queens. ANAs use a unique foraging behavior, where the worker carries another worker to a food resource, then drops off the worker to assist in food transport. ANAs do not form mounds, but instead nest in damp, high humidity areas, such as rotting logs, void spaces, under rocks and in leaf litter. They are typically found in forested areas. They also form multiple colonies within an area, which is called polydomy. ANAs swarm during the spring and early summer, although this time range may vary for Louisiana. People typically encounter the ants when they are working with wet wood or digging in moist soil. This is when someone may potentially be stung, although they are not aggressive. The sting is reported similar to that of a honeybee. Individuals who are allergic to stings may have a life-threatening anaphylactic response if stung by the ant, which requires medical attention. Wearing gloves is adequate protection from ANA stings while working with rotten wood or soil in infested areas. People who are sensitive to other insect stings should be aware of the potential for ANA stings and carry an approved rescue device for severe allergenic responses. In addition to feeding on termites, the Asian needle ant will feed upon beetles, craneflies, springtails and native ants found in their preferred habitats. Because of their ability to prey upon native ants, they can impact native species that deposit seeds in the soil, thus reducing floral diversity. Therefore, ANA is capable of reducing both native animal and plant diversity in infested areas. Article originally posted here.
