Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: in the field of microarrays it has traditionally been difficult to compare new methods to methods in published papers as the many methods available for pre - processing , summarizing and filtering make it almost impossible to work with the exact same data , even when the raw data is made available . that is why we consider reproducible research fundamental as it will facilitate easy 1 ) revision of papers , 2 ) access to data and results , 3 ) communication to other researchers and 4 ) comparison between different methods . reproducible research is gaining relevance among the scientific community as shown by the number of papers published on the subject during the last years @xcite . _ showed that the results of only 2 out of 18 published microarray gene - expression analyses were completely reproducible @xcite . this is why some authors demand that documentation and annotation , database accessions and url links and even scripts with instructions are made publicly available @xcite . journals like biostatistics have even appointed an associate editor for reproducible research , but still treat it as a  desirable goal " rather than a requirement @xcite . setting up a framework for reproducible research necessarily implies working with free and open - source software as for example r / bioconductor @xcite . additionally , using sweave @xcite ( a tool for embedding ` r ` code in latexdocuments @xcite ) , enables automatic reports that can be updated with output from the analysis .    the main tool in this paper will be the bioconductor package ` aroma.affymetrix ` @xcite that can analyse all affymetrix chip types with a ( .cdf ) chip definition file . the number of arrays ( samples ) that can be simultaneously analysed by ` aroma.affymetrix ` is virtually unlimited as the system requirements are just 1 gb ram , for any operating system @xcite . this package is freely available and can easily be installed into ` r ` . the aroma.affymetrix website www.aroma-project.org is conceived as reference for all the possible microarrays that can be analysed with ` aroma.affymetrix ` , and does not focus specifically on the analysis of the genechip  human exon 1.0 st array ( or exon array in short ) . portable scripts for a fast and basic analysis can be obtained on request to ` aroma.affymetrix ` s authors . the analysis of exon array data in ` r`/bioconductor is not yet standard . there are several packages available , and it can be a tremendous effort for a newcomer to maneuver between them , and to overcome the numerous challenges associated with these packages . this paper aims to make this task easier and to provide a quick reference guide to ` aroma.affymetrix ` s documentation . we also explain how to extract data for different statistical analyses and propose a method for gene annotation and for gene profile visualization . for this last step , we use the packages ` biomart ` and ` genomegraphs ` to annotate and visualize the transcripts in a genomic context . the analysis workflow presented in this paper is carried out solely in ` r`/bioconductor , and the paper is available as a sweave ( .snw ) document that will allow the reader to reproduce our exact results . the .snw document can also be converted into an ` r ` script and executed . the workflow starts by reading in the data , followed by background correction and quantile normalization . we then explain how to obtain transcript cluster - , probeset - , and probe - level estimates . afterwards , different methods for the statistical analysis of differential splicing or differential gene expression are reviewed . finally , we make a suggestion on how to annotate transcript clusters to genes in the lists obtained from the statistical analyses , and how to plot the data including genomic information . to exemplify the use of the workflow , an example dataset @xcite is analysed along the way . splicing is the post - transcriptional process that generates mature eukaryotic mrnas from pre - mrnas by removing the non - coding intronic regions and joining together the exonic coding regions . for many genes , two or more splicing events take place during maturation of mrna molecules resulting in a corresponding number of alternatively spliced mrnas . these mature mrnas translate into protein isoforms differing in their amino acid sequence and ultimately in their biochemical and biological properties @xcite . alternative splicing is one of the main tools for generating rna diversity , contributing to the diverse repertoire of transcripts and proteins @xcite . it is known that 92 - 94% of multi - exon human genes are alternatively spliced and that 85% of those have a minor isoform frequency of at least 15% @xcite . in our case we will focus on the detection of differential splicing between groups , as for instance tissue types , or healthy vs. diseased samples . the exon array was presented in october 2005 as a tool for the analysis and profiling of whole - transcriptome expression @xcite . to interrogate each potential exon with at least one probeset , the exon array contains about 5.6 million probes grouped into more than 1.4 million probesets ( most probesets consisting of 4 probes ) , which are further grouped into 1.1 million exon clusters , or collections of overlapping exons . finally , exon clusters are grouped into over 300.000 transcript clusters to describe their relationship , as for example shared splice sites or overlapping exonic sequences . each gene is covered , on average , by 40 probes interrogating regions located along the entire gene @xcite . this probe positioning aims at providing better estimates of gene expression levels than previous arrays , and allows for the study of differential splicing @xcite and differential gene expression based on summarized exon expression . the exon array has three levels of annotation for the interrogated transcript clusters : _ core , extended _ and _ full _ @xcite . core transcript clusters are supported by the most reliable evidence such as refseq transcripts and full - length mrnas @xcite and a core transcript cluster is roughly a gene @xcite ; the extended level contains the core transcript clusters plus cdna - based annotations @xcite and the full level contains the two previous levels plus _ ab - initio _ , or algorithmic , gene predictions @xcite . it is worth noting that ` aroma.affymetrix ` enables the analysis at the three levels of annotation mentioned above , and also that it provides intensity estimates for probes , probesets and transcript clusters , allowing for a variety of options for the analysis . our workflow for the analysis of exon array data starts setting up the required folder structure for ` aroma.affymetrix ` . the data is then preprocessed and summarised at transcript cluster and/or probeset level . next , transcript clusters are analysed with several statistical models to detect differential expression or splicing and the transcripts of interest are annotated and visualised at the end , see figure [ fig : flowchart ] . in the code , places where user input is needed are marked by  * * * " , and places where the user can choose whether to modify parameters are marked by  * * " .    to exemplify the use of the tutorial we have used affymetrix s colon cancer data set @xcite , consisting of a collection of paired samples of colon tumour tissue and adjacent normal tissue from 10 patients and available at http://www.affymetrix.com/support/technical/sample_data/exon_array_data.affx . according to affymetrix s website , the rna samples are from a commercial source . this dataset has been used in a number of papers to evaluate the performance of different analysis methods @xcite and a number of genes have been validated to present differential splicing or not @xcite . the analysis was done in ` r ` version 2.15.1 ( 32 bit ) . start by installing and loading ` aroma.affymetrix ` in ` r ` and loading the other libraries required :    .... > source("http://aroma - project.org / hblite.r " ) > hbinstall("aroma.affymetrix " ) > require(aroma.affymetrix ) > require(biomart ) > require(genomegraphs ) ....      this section corresponds to steps 1 . and 2 . in figure [ fig : flowchart ] . the first step is to create the folder structure : under a main folder of our choice -  ` myworkingdirectory ` " - we will create the  ` rawdata ` " and  ` annotationdata ` " folders , which will be common to all ` aroma.affymetrix ` projects . inside  ` annotationdata ` " , the subfolder  ` chiptypes ` " will contain one subfolder per chip type , with the exact name of the .cdf file provided by affymetrix ,  ` huex-1_0-st - v2 ` " in our case . inside this folder we will save any library and annotation files that might be needed . besides , the  ` mydataset ` " folder will be created under  ` rawdata ` " to store .cel files . these files are the output of a microarray experiment and contain the result of the intensity calculations per probe or pixel . note that the microarray experiment produces one .cel file per array and that one array analyses one sample . affymetrix sometimes refer to their microarrays as  chips " . note also that we need one  ` mydataset ` " folder per experiment and that  ` mydataset ` " will be added as a tag at the end of the ` aroma.affymetrix ` output .    .... > # * * * user - defined working directory > wd < - " myworkingdirectory " > # * * * user - defined data set name > ds < - " mydataset " ....    in the second step we save our library ( chip definition file ( .cdf ) in our case ) and .cel files in the corresponding folders . affymetrix s unsupported .cdf files can be downloaded from    http://www.affymetrix.com/auth/support/downloads/library_files/huex-1_0-st-v2.cdf.zip    , note that registration is needed . for the exon array , elizabeth purdom has created a number of binary .cdf files based on affymetrix s text .cdf file @xcite that are faster to query and more memory efficient . such binary .cdf files for core , extended and full sets of probesets can be downloaded from http://aroma-project.org/node/122 . in the example below we use the custom aroma file for core transcript clusters , which might be updated in the future . our original .cel files will be copied from the user - specified  ` mycelfiledirectory ` " into the exon  ` rawdata ` " subfolder ( the code is part of the .snw version of this paper ) . the desired output folder specified in  ` output.folder ` " should exist in advance .    .... > # * * download user - defined library file > library.file < -   +    paste(annotation.data.exon ,   +          " huex-1_0-st - v2,corer3,a20071112,ep.cdf " , +          sep = " / " ) > download.address < -   +       " http://bcgc.lbl.gov/cdffiles/ " > file < - paste("huex-1_0-st - v2,a20071112,ep " ,   +              " huex-1_0-st - v2,corer3,a20071112,ep.cdf " , +              sep = " / " ) > custom.cdf < -   +       paste(download.address , file , sep = " ") > download.file(url = custom.cdf ,   +                destfile = library.file ,   +                mode = " wb " , quiet = false ) > # * * * user - defined directory containing .cel files > cel.directory   < - " mycelfiledirectory "   > # * * * user - defined output folder > output.folder < - " output.folder " ....    besides , the sample information should be saved in a tab separated file with column names ` celfile ` , ` replicate ` , and ` treatment ` containing .cel file name ( without .cel ) , replicate identifier and treatment name , respectively . this file should be called `` sampleinformation.txt '' and it will be copied from the user - specified directory into the ` \rawdata\mydataset \huex-1_0-st - v2 ` folder ( which will also contain the .cel files ) after it has been created . the sample information file for the colon cancer example is attached as an additional file .    .... < -   +      read.table(file = paste(raw.data.exon ,   +                 " sampleinformation.txt " , sep = " / " ) , +                 sep = " \t " , header = true ) ....    finally , netaffx transcript clusters and probesets annotation files should be saved in `` ` annotationdata / chiptypes/ ` '' `` ` huex-1_0-st - v2 ` '' . we have used release 32 , which was most up to date at the time of writing and we downloaded files `` huex-1_0-st - v2.na32.hg19.transcript.csv.zip '' and `` huex-1_0-st - v2.na32.hg19.probeset.csv.zip '' from    http://www.affymetrix.com/estore/browse/products.jsp?productid=131452&categoryid=35676&productname=genechip-human-exon-st-array#1_3    , _ technical documentation _ tab , under _ netaffx annotation files_. the extracted .csv files should be converted into .rdata files for querying them faster in the future . note that the number of lines to skip might differ for future annotation files .    .... transcript.clusters.netaffx.32 < -   +      read.csv(file = paste(annotation.data.exon , +          " huex-1_0-st - v2.na32.hg19.transcript.csv " ,   +          sep = " / " ) , skip=24 ) > probesets.netaffx.32 < -   + read.csv(file = paste(annotation.data.exon , +           " huex-1_0-st - v2.na32.hg19.probeset.csv " ,   +           sep = " / " ) , skip=23 )   ....      after defining chip type and dataset , background correction and quantile normalization are carried out as shown in figure [ fig : flowchart ] , step 3 . in these pre - processing steps , it is possible to use either affymetrix s original .cdf file , the .cdf files provided by the aroma project ( the file for core transcript clusters in our example ) , or a .cdf file created by the user . the summarization step , however , must be done using one of the custom .cdf files available at the ` aroma.affymetrix ` project website . background correction as defined by irizarry @xcite and quantile normalization are performed by the ` rmabackgroundcorrection ( ) ` and ` quantilenormalization ( ) ` functions , respectively . the raw , background corrected and quantile normalized probe intensities can be visualized using the ` plotdensity ( ) ` function applied to the corresponding object . summarization is done with the ` exonrmaplm ` function @xcite . the parameter ` mergegroups ` determines whether to summarize at transcript level ( ` true ` ) or probeset level ( ` false ` ) . all the functions described automatically create subfolders such as  plmdata " or  probedata " inside  ` myworkingdirectory ` " . a more detailed version of this code with interesting comments about the choice of .cdf and possibilities for quality control is available at http://www.aroma-project.org/vignettes/firma-humanexonarrayanalysis .    .... > chiptype < - " huex-1_0-st - v2 "   > # * * user - defined .cdf file : change tags parameter > cdf < - affymetrixcdffile$bychiptype(chiptype ,   +                     tags = " corer3,a20071112,ep " ) > cs < - affymetrixcelset$byname(ds , cdf = cdf )   >   > # background correction > bc < - rmabackgroundcorrection(cs )   > csbc < - process(bc , verbose = verbose )   >   > # quantile normalization > qn < - quantilenormalization(csbc ,   +                 typestoupdate = " pm " ) > csn < - process(qn , verbose = verbose ) >   > # summarization > # transcript cluster level > plmtr   < - exonrmaplm(csn , mergegroups = true ,   +                 tag = " coreprobesetsgeneexpression " ) > # probeset / exon level > plmex   < - exonrmaplm(csn , mergegroups = false ,   +                 tag = " coreprobesetsexonexpression " )             ....      the ` aroma.affymetrix ` documentation focuses on analyses at the probeset and transcript cluster levels . the respective intensities are obtained by applying the function ` getchipeffectset ( ) ` to the transcript or probeset ` plm ` objects ( ` plmtr ` and ` plmex ` , respectively ) and then extracting the corresponding dataframes . however , it is also possible to extract the background corrected and quantile normalized intensities of all probes using the function ` getunitintensities ` . while ` plmtr ` is suitable for the firma analysis ( [ subsec : statistics ] ) , ` plmex ` is well suited for probeset - level analysis . for the linear model analysis described in section [ subsec : statistics ] we have created one list of dataframes containing probe intensities per transcript cluster , and another list of dataframes containing probeset intensities per cluster ( code included in .snw ) .    .... > # extract a matrix of gene intensities > cestr < - getchipeffectset(plmtr ) > trfit < - extractdataframe(cestr , addnames = true )   > # extract a matrix of probeset intensities > cesex < - getchipeffectset(plmex ) > exfit < - extractdataframe(cesex , addnames = true )   > # extract a list of probe intensities per gene > unitintensities < -                readunits(csn , verbose = verbose )   ....    the high number of transcript clusters analysed in combination with the usually small number of chips tends to cause a high number of false positives @xcite . in order to reduce the number of false positives , affymetrix recommends to perform detection above background ( dabg ) @xcite on the dataset prior to the analysis @xcite . the dabg procedure is not implemented in ` aroma.affymetrix ` , so we decided to follow the procedure described in @xcite and use 3 as a threshold for the probeset intensity , so that probesets with a @xmath0 intensity below 3 will be marked as absent . except for this change , we followed the guidelines proposed in @xcite to remove absent transcript clusters and probesets , where neither probesets that are absent in more than half of the samples of a group nor transcript clusters with more than half of the probesets absent are analysed .    besides this filtering based on expression levels , another filtering that removes probesets presenting cross - hybridization is also advisable @xcite . cross - hybridising probesets are identified in file `` huex-1_0-st - v2.na32.hg19.probeset.csv '' and removed . affymetrix recommends to filter them out after the analysis , but we have decided not to include them in the analysis in order to narrow down the number of probesets / transcript clusters to investigate .    the filtering procedure is part of the .snw file . in our example , where we analysed only core probesets , 136233 probesets out of 284258 were deemed present by our filter , and the number of transcript clusters to analyse ( present in both samples ) was reduced from 18708 to 8401 .      in this section we give an overview of model - based statistical methods available for the analysis of differential splicing and suggest a method for the analysis of differential gene expression . the analyses carried out in this paper are model - based approaches , and the analysis of differential splicing is done genewise . the models we use are extensions of the linear model by li and wong @xcite @xmath1 where @xmath2 is the intensity measure of probe @xmath3 for treatment @xmath4 , @xmath5 is a probe affinity term , @xmath6 is the gene - level estimate for treatment @xmath4 , and @xmath7 is the error term .    * anosva * ( analysis of splicing variation ) was presented by cline _ _ @xcite and is a two - way anova model with probeset and treatment as factors :    @xmath8    where @xmath9 is the intensity measure of probe @xmath3 in probeset @xmath10 and treatment @xmath4 , the overall mean @xmath11 is the baseline level of all probes in all experiments , and @xmath12 and @xmath6 are the probeset and treatment effects . the interaction term @xmath13 tells whether the effect of the probeset depends on the treatment and is therefore key to the detection of differential splicing .    the model in can be extended to include random effects associated to replications from the same individual , @xmath14 : @xmath15 where @xmath16 is the random effect of each individual @xmath14 and @xmath17 is the random chip effect . the error terms @xmath18 are i.i.d . @xmath19-distributed .    under the null - hypothesis of no differential splicing , the @xmath13 s will all be zero , therefore we consider the test statistic @xmath20 where @xmath21 is the estimate for @xmath13 , and @xmath22 is the standard error of @xmath21 . large values will be critical for the null hypothesis . under the model assumptions , @xmath4 will follow a @xmath23 distribution ( * ? ? ? 5 ) , with @xmath24 the total number of observations per transcript cluster , @xmath25 the number of treatments , @xmath26 the number of probesets in the transcript cluster and @xmath27 the number of individuals . for each gene , the smallest @xmath3-value from the above @xmath4-tests is regarded as a measure of confidence that the gene is differentially spliced across the experimental conditions @xcite . the interaction estimates and variances and thus the test statistics are contrast - dependent , so choosing a different contrast will alter the gene lists . in our analysis , we have used the ` sum ` contrast available in ` r ` , where parameter estimates are centred around zero .    a package in ` r ` for fitting linear and generalized linear mixed - effects models is ` lme4 ` @xcite . linear mixed - effects models can also be analysed using ` lm ` , which is faster but requires a balanced design . in our example dataset we use ` lm ` to fit the model in equation ( [ eq : meanosva ] ) to the probe level estimates obtained using ` unitintensities ( ) ` from ` aroma.affymetrix ` to 8075 multiexonic transcript clusters . here , we only show the code corresponding to equation , the rest of the code is part of the .snw file .    .... > # * * user - defined parameters for linear model > lm < -   +      lm(intensity ~ probeset + treatment +   +                   c(probeset : treatment , contr.sum ) +   +                   replicate / treatment ) > n.probesets < - length(unique(dataframe$probeset ) ) > main.effects < -   +             1 + ( n.probesets - 1 ) +   +             ( length(unique(dataframe$treatment ) ) - 1 )   > ds.parameters < - ( n.probesets - 1 ) * +            ( length(unique(dataframe$treatment ) ) - 1 ) > p.t < -   +      min(summary(lm)$coefficients[(main.effects+1 ) : +        ( main.effects + ds.parameters),"pr(>|t| ) " ] ) ....    although the vast majority of probesets contain 4 probes , transcript clusters containing probesets with less than 4 probes will give rise to an unbalanced design . nevertheless , the @xmath4-distribution is almost a normal distribution for long transcript clusters so the unbalanced design does not have any practical implications . for shorter transcript clusters , however , an unbalanced design might be a problem . the top 10 most differentially spliced genes , sorted by the minimum @xmath3-value of their @xmath4-tests , appear in table [ tab : anosvaprobe ] . zak _ was validated as differentially spliced in @xcite . see figure [ fig : anosvaprobe ] for the profile plot of _ klk10 _ , where the thick lines representing the mean intensity in each group have been plotted for easing the interpretation . note that there is one measurement per probe in each probeset , typically 4 probes per probeset . how to obtain such plots is described in section [ subsec : annotationandvisualization ] below . the genes in figures [ fig : anosvaprobe ] , [ fig : anosvaprobeset ] , [ fig : firma ] and [ fig : deprobe ] were chosen because they span over a shorter genomic region and show a more clear picture of the relationship between probesets and exons than the other genes in the lists of top 10 genes . a slight variation of anosva is the probeset - model as implemented in partek @xcite ( note that the probe subscript @xmath3 has been removed ) : @xmath28    for the probeset - level anosva we used the probeset level estimates obtained by ` affyplm ( ... , mergegroups = false ) ` . after filtering for non - present or cross - hybridising probesets , and absent transcript clusters , we were left with 9494 transcript clusters to study . these clusters are sorted according to the minimum @xmath3-value of the individual @xmath4-test scores for differential splicing , and the top 10 genes obtained appear in table [ tab : anosvaprobeset ] . the genes _ mmp11 , zak _ and _ comp _ are in the top 10 genes for both the anosva probe and the anosva probeset models . gene _ tgfbi _ appears in figure [ fig : anosvaprobeset ] . * firma * ( finding isoforms using robust multichip analysis ) was first introduced by purdom _ @xcite for the exon array . in presence of differential splicing the model in will not fit and this will show up in the residuals . the linear model used is the following : @xmath29 with @xmath5 the probe affinity , @xmath30 the gene - level effect for chip @xmath31 and the error terms @xmath18 are i.i.d . @xmath19-distributed . note that in contrast to the model in we do not compute an overall gene - level estimate , but a gene - level estimate per chip .    as in model , there is no treatment / probeset interaction term , so differential splicing is analysed probesetwise , using the residuals per probeset @xmath10 : @xmath32 where @xmath33 and @xmath34 are the estimates of @xmath5 and @xmath30 . the median of the standardized residuals per probeset per chip is chosen as score statistic : @xmath35 the standardization with the median absolute deviation ( mad ) of the residuals per gene makes the scores comparable across transcript clusters . the firma scores are extracted from the ` plmtr ` object obtained in section [ subsec : pre - processing ] . all probesets and transcript clusters were analysed by firma , since it is part of the default ` aroma.affymetrix ` workflow .    .... > firma < - firmamodel(plmtr ) > fit(firma , verbose = verbose ) > fs < - getfirmascores(firma ) > firma.scores < - extractdataframe(fs ) ....    after obtaining the firma scores per probeset per sample , we proceeded as described in @xcite : 1 ) for each probeset we took the difference of firma scores for each of the 10 pairs of normal / cancer samples and 2 ) calculated the mean of the 10 differences per probeset . then 3 ) we ranked the probesets according to their absolute mean difference : as the scores are comparable across transcript clusters , larger average differences between the normal and cancer samples will point at exons more differentially spliced between the two conditions . the resulting list was filtered to keep only probesets and transcript clusters that has passed the filter described in [ subsec : extractingintensities ] above , the code is part of the .snw file . in order to get a gene list instead of a probeset list as in @xcite we mapped probesets to transcript clusters and then selected the top 10 genes on the list , see table [ tab : firma ] . the profile plot of gene _ lgals4 _ appears in figure [ fig : firma ] . the very high average difference for this gene is due to a firma score of 830030.8 at probeset _ 3861578 _ corresponding to the tumour sample of replicate 7 .    out of 14 genes investigated for differential splicing in ( * table 1 ) , 10 passed our filtering procedure and were analysed for differential splicing : _ actn1 , vcl , cald1 , slc3a2 , col6a3 , cttn , fn1 , mast2 , zak _ and _ fxyd6_. the gene _ zak _ appears in the top 10 genes from anosva probe and anosva probeset , but a plot is not produced automatically by the code because _ zak _ is not recognised by biomart . instead , we looked the gene up in pubmed obtaining the ensembl i d : ensg00000091436 , and used this to plot the gene , see figure [ fig : zak ] . the gene _ col6a3 _ appears among the top 100 genes for the anosva probe and the anosva probeset methods . gene _ actn1 _ is among the top 100 genes for anosva probeset and it is also the first of gardina s genes to appear in the filtered firma list , at position 154 . +      in this section we analyse differential gene expression using probe level data . we study two types of transcript clusters : 1 ) the ones not included in the anosva probe analysis above ( with only one probeset or not present in both normal and cancer groups ) and 2 ) the ones not showing differential splicing ( anosva probe @xmath3-value above 0.1 ) . the analysis of group 2 ) is based on the hierarchical principle : only look for significant main effects ( differential expression in this case ) among those transcript clusters with no significant interaction terms ( differential splicing ) @xcite . in total , we analysed 16231 transcript clusters . we fit the following linear model to those transcript clusters : @xmath36 where @xmath6 is the gene level treatment effect , @xmath12 is a parameter that captures probesets expressed above or below the overall transcript cluster level and @xmath16 and @xmath17 are random effects for patient and chip , respectively .    .... > aov < -   +     aov(intensity ~ probeset + treatment +   +             error(replicate + replicate : treatment ) ) > p.f < -   +    summary(aov)$"error : within"[[1]]["treatment " ,   +                                         " pr(>f ) " ] ....    the null hypothesis is that the gene expression is the same in all groups . the top 10 genes , with adjusted @xmath3-values appear in table [ tab : de ] . the method used for adjusting the @xmath3-values was benjamini - hochberg s correction @xcite using the function ` p.adjust ( ... , method = bh ) ` . only 80 out of 159 genes appearing in gardina s list of genes up- and down - regulated in tumour ( * ? ? ? * additional file 1 ) passed our filters and were analysed for differential gene expression . among those analysed , the genes _ cldn1 , sst , musk , kiaa1199 _ and _ slc30a10 _ were in the top 100 . best4 _ is shown in figure [ fig : deprobe ] . this gene is down - regulated in tumour ( blue ) compared to normal ( red ) samples . the thicker lines represent the mean expression levels in the two groups . .top 10 differentially expressed genes from with corrected @xmath3-values . best4 _ , highlighted in gray , appears in figure [ fig : deprobe ] . [ tab : de ] [ cols="<,>",options="header " , ]      we chose to annotate transcript clusters to genes using the netaffx transcript cluster annotation release 32 specified in section [ subsec : folderandfiles ] using the ` annotategenes ( ) ` function . some transcript clusters present unspecific annotation and have several possible associated gene names . we have decided to remove such clusters from our output as we can not map them uniquely to a gene and afterwards interpret the result according to the gene structure . after gene annotation , the user can select genes for visual inspection . visual inspection of candidates for differential splicing is recommended by affymetrix as a way to identify possible false positives @xcite . plots of gene profiles with integrated genomic information are obtained using the ` biomart ` @xcite and ` genomegraphs ` @xcite packages in bioconductor . we use ` biomart ` to connect to the latest version of the homo sapiens dataset in ensembl @xcite ( ensembl genes 68 , grch37.p8 at the time of writing ) and retrieve genes by their hgnc symbol @xcite . gene and exon structures are imported from ensembl . ` gene ` and ` exon ` objects are created by ` makegene ( ) ` and ` maketranscript ( ) ` from ` genomegraphs ` . we store expression data and probeset start and stop positions in an ` exonarray ` object by ` makeexonarray ( ) ` . the final plot is created passing a list with the objects created to the ` gdplot(list(exon , gene , transcript , ... ) ) ` function . our plots show on top the gene hgnc symbol followed by ( + ) for genes on the forward strand and by ( - ) for those on the reverse strand . below , the plot of probeset intensities appears with vertical lines delimiting probesets . note that for models based on probe - level data ( anosva probe , firma and differential expression ) , the intensities of all probes in the probeset ( 1 to 4 ) are shown . samples from the same treatment group appear in the same colour , red for normal samples and in blue for tumour samples in this case . immediately after the profile plot , the gene model retrieved from ensembl is shown in orange , followed by the possible transcript model(s ) in blue . the gene model consists of the exons that appear in all possible transcript models . exons ( boxes ) in the gene model are linked by blue lines to the probesets above , indicating which probeset(s ) interrogate which exon . see figures [ fig : anosvaprobe ] to [ fig : deprobe ] . the aim of this paper was to give a tutorial on how to perform a complete and reproducible analysis of exon array data in ` r`/bioconductor . we have worked with three packages : ` aroma.affymetrix ` , ` biomart ` and ` genomegraphs ` to go from .cel files to intensity data , statistical analysis , annotation and visualization . the packages were chosen for their flexibility and easy of integration . we believe that our workflow covers a number of analysis variants for the exon array , including differential splicing analysis at probe and probeset - level and differential expression analysis at probe level , and gives the user the opportunity to focus on all or only some of the aspects of the data analysis . we make our entire code available so that other researchers can use it as it is or adapt it to their needs . different bioconductor packages could have been used in some of the analysis steps . for example , ` xmapcore ` @xcite provides annotation data and cross - mappings between genetic features as transcript clusters or exons and affymetrix probesets . this package , however , requires the separate installation of a mysql database , which makes this a more complex alternative than the one we have chosen . the ` xps ` package @xcite could have been used for data pre - processing and summarization , but it requires the installation of the ` root ` framework @xcite , and a certain level of understanding of root files and root trees is recommended . our workflow does not require any prior knowledge beyond ` r`/bioconductor . other free software includes brb - array tools @xcite , based on ` r ` , c , fortran and java , with an excel front end , and dchip @xcite , which is written in visual c`++ ` and developed for windows - though some users have been able to run it on mac and unix computers . a previous paper on exon arrays @xcite suggests a pragmatic approach and does the analysis piecewise starting with affymetrix power tools ( apt ) and then exporting the data to ` r ` . we recognise this is a fix for the lack of straightforward packages for dealing with the exon array in bioconductor . however , it implies working with several pieces of software so we do not find it fit for reproducible research . licensed software , like partek @xcite or genespring gx @xcite , has been used in other studies @xcite . in contrast to licensed software , ` r`/bioconductor is free and available for anyone , it allows the user to control most analysis options and it enables customizable and reproducible analyses that are more easily reviewed . still , the ` aroma.affymetrix ` package does not provide the speed of affymetrix power tools or the licensed software , and it requires more user input . nevertheless , with this code and minimal user input , any dataset can be analysed regarding differential expression at probe level and differential splicing using the anosva model . differential gene expression could have been analysed using the gene level estimates obtained from the ` plmtr ` object in other ` r ` packages such as ` limma ` @xcite . another extension of the workflow could include a general analysis strategy of the firma scores , which in this study was tailor - made for a two - treatment scenario . besides , the profile plots we obtained with ` genomegraphs ` , though highly informative , are difficult to interpret for genes spanning over a long genomic region , as for example _ tgfbi _ in figure [ fig : anosvaprobeset ] and _ zak _ in figure [ fig : zak ] . in the future , it would be interesting to study the flexibility of the output imported from ensembl and , for example , remove the intronic regions from the gene and transcript models . the authors would like to thank henrik bengtsson for helpful answers and comments regarding ` aroma.affymetrix ` . the authors would also like to thank hang phan and anders ellern bilgrau for helpful discussions and ideas about code implementation and data plotting . mrd designed and implemented the workflow , analysed data and drafted the manuscript . rw assisted in paper drafting and statistical modelling and interpretation . jsb , sf and mkk tested the workflow . jsb , mkk , hej and kds assisted with data interpretation and participated in paper drafting . mb conceived and tested the workflow , assisted in manuscript drafting and coordinated the work . all authors read and approved the final manuscript . bengtsson h , simpson k , bullard j , et  al . : a generic framework in r for analyzing small to very large affymetrix data sets in bounded memory . technical report 745 , department of statistics , university of california , berkeley , 2008 .
Abstract:

Answer: alternative splicing is the post - transcriptional process by which a single gene can produce multiple transcripts and thereby protein isoforms . the presence of different transcripts of a gene across samples can be analysed by whole - transcriptome microarrays . reproducing results from published microarray data represents a challenge due to the vast amounts of data and the large variety of pre - processing and filtering steps employed before the actual analysis is carried out . to ensure a firm basis for methodological development where results with new methods are compared with previous results it is crucial to ensure that all analyses are completely reproducible for other researchers . we here give a detailed workflow on how to perform reproducible analysis of the genechip  human exon 1.0 st array at probe and probeset level solely in ` r`/bioconductor , choosing packages based on their simplicity of use . to exemplify the use of the proposed workflow we analyse differential splicing and differential gene expression in a publicly available dataset using various statistical methods . we believe this study will provide other researchers with an easy way of accessing gene expression data at different annotation levels and with the sufficient details needed for developing their own tools for reproducible analysis of the genechip  human exon 1.0 st array . + * contact : * maria@math.aau.dk


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: dust plays important roles in cosmic star formation and evolution of the galaxies . the basic ingredients of dust grains are metals produced through past stellar activity , and thus the main reservoir of dust is conventionally thought to be mainly confined in interstellar space within galaxies . @xcite , however , suggested the existence of dust filling the intracluster space within the coma cluster . this motivated the investigation of the abundance and spatial distribution of dust in different environments , including the color - excess of background objects due to dust optical - uv reddening @xcite , and the fir dust emission from individual objects @xcite , and from stacking analysis @xcite . recently , mnard et al . ( 2010a : hereafter msfr ) investigated the distribution of dust around galaxies by measuring the angular correlation between sdss galaxy distribution and distant quasar colors . they found that the mean @xmath1-@xmath2 reddening profile around sdss galaxies is well approximated by a single power - law : @xmath3 where @xmath4 is the angular separation between foreground galaxies and background quasars . furthermore they discovered that the above power - law extends even for @xmath5 . the angular scale corresponds to several mpc at the mean redshift @xmath6 of their sdss galaxy sample . this is far beyond the typical scale of galactic disks , and even larger than the virial radius of typical galaxy clusters . msfr appear to interpret their result as an evidence for an extended dust surrounding an individual galaxy beyond a few mpc , which we refer to as _ the circum - galactic dust model _ ( cgd model ) . their interpretation , however , is rather subtle . the mean reddening profile from their measurement @xmath7 is close to that of the angular correlation function of galaxies . thus the detected dust reddening may be equally explained by the summation of the dust component associated with the central part of galaxies according to the spatial clustering of those galaxies , which will be referred to as _ the inter - stellar dust model _ ( isd model ) .    in practice , it is difficult to distinguish between the cgd and isd models on the basis of the statistical correlation analysis alone as performed by msfr . therefore a complementary and independent method to constrain the nature of the dust is needed . this is exactly what we attempt to propose in this paper .    for that purpose , we measure the dust far - infrared ( fir ) emission of the sdss galaxies by image stacking analysis . similar analysis on the sfd galactic extinction map ( * ? ? ? * sfd ) has detected the fir emission of sdss galaxies ( * ? ? ? * kys13 ) . we return to the @xmath0 intensity map by sfd , instead of their extinction map , and perform the stacking analysis of the same galaxy sample used by msfr . if the detected fir emission originates from the same dust component as the msfr reddening measurement , the emission to absorption ratio puts a constraint on dust temperature , which would in turn offer complementary information to distinguish between the cgd and isd models mentioned above . the present paper is organized as follows . the data used in the current analysis are described in section 2 . in section 3 , we perform the stacking analysis of the msfr galaxy sample on iras / sfd @xmath0 map . we show the constraint on the dust temperature from the detected fir emission combined with the msfr reddening measurement . we present summary and conclusions of the paper , and discuss future outlook in section 4 . throughout the analysis , we assume the standard @xmath8cdm cosmology with @xmath9 , @xmath10 , and @xmath11 . we select our galaxy sample from the sdss dr7 photometric galaxies with 5 passbands , @xmath12 , @xmath1 , @xmath13 , @xmath2 , and @xmath14 , in northern galactic cap , which covers @xmath157600 @xmath16 . for details of the photometric data , see @xcite . we conservatively masked @xmath17 of the total area following the sdss mask definition . we also removed the objects with bad photometry or fast - moving flag according to the photometry flags , which are suspicious to be correlated with the galactic foreground . see @xcite for more details of our data selection .    for the current analysis , we impose the same @xmath2-band magnitude cut , @xmath18 , as the msfr sample for a direct comparison with their results , where the magnitudes of the galaxies are correct for galactic extinction using the sfd map @xcite . our final sample collects @xmath19 galaxies .    for far - infrared data , we use the all - sky diffuse 100@xmath20 map provided by sfd ; they have carefully processed the original iras / issa 100@xmath20 sky map , removing the scan pattern of _ iras _ , correcting calibration errors based on cobe / dirbe data , and subtracting zodiacal dust emission and bright point sources with @xmath21 . hereafter , we adopt a gaussian with @xmath22 for the point spread function ( psf ) of sfd / iras map , as measured by similar stacking analysis by kys13 . following the procedures of kys13 , we stack the sfd / iras 100@xmath20 map over @xmath23 squares centered on each sdss galaxy . each image is randomly rotated around the center . the resulting stacked image shows clear circular signature of dust emission associated with those galaxies ( kys13 ) . the radial profile of the raw stacked image is shown in figure [ fig : profile]a . the quoted error bars reflect the _ rms _ in each radial bin ( @xmath24 ) . the radial profile is reasonably well fitted by gaussian corresponding to the psf around the central region , but exhibits an extended tail beyond the psf width , @xmath22 , which corresponds to roughly @xmath25 for the mean redshift @xmath26 of the sdss galaxies .    at sufficiently large @xmath4 , the stacked flux should be dominated by the galactic foreground , which is uncorrelated with the sdss galaxies and expected to be constant . the stacked flux , however , increases beyond @xmath27 . while we do not completely understand the behavior ( see also discussion in kys13 ) , it may be partly due to the fact that the sdss survey region is designed to be located at the low - extinction region , therefore towards high galactic latitudes . thus the outskirt of the sdss region is surrounded by low galactic latitudes with relatively higher values of the 100@xmath20 intensity , and the stacked flux centered at the sdss region tends to be systematically larger at larger @xmath4 . nevertheless the profile for @xmath28 matches nicely that expected from angular correlation functions of sdss galaxies ( okabe et al . in preparation ) . this is why we adopt the profile modeling discussed below . ( before subtracting the offset level due to the galactic dust ) . shaded region indicates the data with @xmath29 that are not used in the current analysis . ( _ b _ ) ; radial profile of the stacked image after subtracting the offset level of @xmath30}$ ] , which is computed assuming @xmath31 and shown as the dashed line in panel a. the lines indicate the best - fits for @xmath32 ( black dotted ) , @xmath33 ( red solid ) , and @xmath34 ( blue dot - dashed ) ; see equation ( [ eq : model ] ) . just for reference , we plot the power - laws of @xmath35 , 0.86 and 1.05 in dashed lines , which covers the ranges of the msfr result in equation ( [ eq : egimsfr ] ) . ]     ( before subtracting the offset level due to the galactic dust ) . shaded region indicates the data with @xmath29 that are not used in the current analysis . ( _ b _ ) ; radial profile of the stacked image after subtracting the offset level of @xmath30}$ ] , which is computed assuming @xmath31 and shown as the dashed line in panel a. the lines indicate the best - fits for @xmath32 ( black dotted ) , @xmath33 ( red solid ) , and @xmath34 ( blue dot - dashed ) ; see equation ( [ eq : model ] ) . just for reference , we plot the power - laws of @xmath35 , 0.86 and 1.05 in dashed lines , which covers the ranges of the msfr result in equation ( [ eq : egimsfr ] ) . ] we adopt the following radial density profile of dust : @xmath36 where @xmath32 and @xmath33 represent the contributions from the central single galaxy ( single term ) and from the clustered neighbor galaxies ( clustering term ) , respectively , and @xmath37 is the background level of the foreground galactic dust emission . , @xmath32 , and @xmath33 are equivalent to @xmath38 , @xmath39 , and @xmath40 used in kys13 , respectively , except that @xmath41 denotes the sfd map extinction in units of [ mag ] , whereas @xmath42 in this paper denotes the intensity in units of [ mjr / sr ] . ] we assume that the galactic foreground , @xmath37 , should be uncorrelated with the sdss galaxies , and thus is assumed to be constant at @xmath28 . since the psf of sfd / iras map is well approximated by gaussian , @xmath43 is written as @xmath44 where @xmath22 is the gaussian width of psf .    the clustering term @xmath33 is written in terms of @xmath32 and angular two - point correlation function ( 2pcf ) of galaxy , @xmath45 , as @xmath46 where @xmath47 is the differential number count of galaxies ( whether or not detected by sdss ) as a function of @xmath48 . we assume that the single term is written as a function of @xmath49 alone , therefore the dependence on other physical quantities is neglected . we approximate the angular 2pcf is described as a single power - law in this angular scale @xcite ; @xmath50 where the amplitude @xmath51 is a function of @xmath49 , but the index @xmath52 is assumed to be a constant and independent of @xmath49 . in this case , equation ( [ eq : cterm ] ) reduces to @xmath53 where @xmath54 denotes the confluent hypergeometric function , and @xmath55 we fit the radial profile of the stacked image using equations ( [ eq : model ] ) , ( [ eq : istheta ] ) , and ( [ eq : ictheta ] ) . in doing so , we do not use equation ( [ eq : ic0 ] ) , but treat @xmath56 simply as one of the fitting parameters empirically determined from the observed profile . consistency of the resulting @xmath56 with equations ( [ eq : wtheta ] ) and ( [ eq : ic0 ] ) independently measured for sdss galaxies is an interesting topic ( kys13 ) , which will be discussed in detail elsewhere ( okabe et al . in preparation ) . we estimate the statistical errors using the jackknife resampling method by dividing the entire sdss sky area into 400 patches of equal area . the detected emission profile at small @xmath4 is affected due to the iras psf , and should not be directly compared with the msfr measurement . therefore , we use the clustering term , which is relevant for @xmath57 , for the dust temperature constraint in the following section . in fact , the psf effect on the clustering term vanishes at large @xmath4 and equation ( [ eq : ictheta ] ) reduces to the power - law as @xmath58 since we ( implicitly ) assume here that the mean reddening profile of msfr , equation ( [ eq : egimsfr ] ) , is explained in the clustered dust model , the value of @xmath52 in equation ( [ eq : wtheta ] ) should match the msfr result . in order to confirm the validity of the assumption , we first choose @xmath59 , @xmath56 , @xmath37 , and @xmath52 as free parameters , and fit to the observed profile imposing @xmath60 and @xmath61 . the resulting best - fit value , @xmath62 , is consistent with that of msfr , @xmath63 ( the other best - fit values include @xmath64}$ ] , @xmath65}$ ] , and @xmath66}$ ] ) . indeed as figure [ fig : profile ] illustrates , the difference among the predicted profiles for @xmath67 is very small for the angular scales of our interest @xmath68 . the departure from the power - law for @xmath69}$ ] is not a problem because it simply reflects the sensitivity to the subtracted offset @xmath37 . thus we fix @xmath31 in what follows , and obtain the best - fit parameters as @xmath70}$ ] , @xmath71}$ ] , and @xmath72}$ ] . the best - fit profile for each component is shown in figure [ fig : profile ] . the stacked fir emission profile corresponding to the clustering term for @xmath31 is finally given as @xmath73 at large @xmath4 , which plays a major role in our method proposed in section [ subsec : constraints ] . we note that while the statistical error of @xmath37 is much larger than the best - fit values of @xmath74 and @xmath75 themselves , it does not affect the detection significance of the dust emission from sdss galaxies . in fact , the variance of @xmath37 simply comes from that of the galactic dust over the sdss survey area ; the majority of the 400 jackknife subsamples indicates similar signatures of the dust emission , except for the difference of @xmath37 . it is interesting to note that the observed stacked profile and the prediction from the summation of individual sdss galaxies indeed agree very well , as mentioned in section 1 . thus we will proceed further to an independent and complementary analysis in order to constrain the spatial extent of dust in the rest of this section .      while the dust _ extinction _ is determined mainly by its column density , the dust _ emission _ depends sensitively on its temperature as well . therefore , if the measured extinction and emission comes from the same dust distribution , their ratio serves as a sensitive measure of the dust temperature . in this subsection , we will explicitly show theoretical expressions for the reddening and emission of dust in a simple model of dust density distribution . since we are interested in the scales beyond the galactic disk scale , we consider the clustering term alone . the angular profiles of dust extinction and emission around a galaxy are calculated by integrating the dust surface density @xmath76 of nearby galaxies at @xmath14 separated by the projected distance @xmath77 from the central galaxy , where @xmath78 is the angular diameter distance at @xmath14 . for simplicity , we assume that the 2-dimensional projected dust surface density responsible for the clustering term is given by a single power - law : @xmath79 throughout the current model , we set the power - law index @xmath52 as that of the galaxy angular correlation function , equation ( [ eq : wtheta ] ) , specifically @xmath31 in what follows . although we neglect the redshift evolution of the correlation length @xmath80 , it is effectively absorbed in @xmath81 as long as @xmath52 is time - independent as assumed here .    under the above assumptions , the angular extinction profile of dust at redshift @xmath14 is written as @xmath82 \nonumber \\ & = & \frac{2.5}{\ln 10 }   \left [ \kappa_{\rm ext}\left(\frac{\lambda_g}{1+z}\right ) -   \kappa_{\rm ext}\left(\frac{\lambda_i}{1+z}\right ) \right ] \nonumber \\   & \times & \sigma_{\rm d}\big(d_a(z)\theta , z\big),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath83 and @xmath84 are the rest - frame wavelengths of sdss @xmath1 and @xmath2-bands , respectively , and @xmath85 is the extinction cross - section per unit dust mass at a wavelength of @xmath86 . the average angular extinction profile around sdss galaxies is then given by @xmath87^{-1 } \cr & \times & \int^{\infty}_0 \left [ \kappa_{\rm ext } \left(\frac{\lambda_g}{1+z}\right ) - \kappa_{\rm ext } \left(\frac{\lambda_i}{1+z}\right ) \right ]   \cr & ~&\times~\sigma_{\rm d0}(z ) \left(\frac{d_a(z)\theta}{r_{p,0}}\right)^{-\gamma}\frac{dn}{dz}dz,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath88 is the redshift distribution of sdss galaxies . following msfr , we adopt an approximation @xcite : @xmath89 thus the number - weighted mean redshift of the sample is given by @xmath90 one can similarly compute the angular fir emission profile around sdss galaxies . since the dust emission at @xmath91 is well approximated by the blackbody spectrum , the corresponding surface brightness at redshift @xmath14 is given as @xmath92 where @xmath93 is the absorption cross section per unit dust mass , @xmath94 is the blackbody spectrum per unit frequency , @xmath95 is the dust temperature , which we assume to be independent of @xmath14 , and the same for all sdss galaxies , and @xmath96 comes from the cosmological dimming effect . the average angular emission profile of sdss galaxies , which corresponds to @xmath97 observed by the stacking analysis , is given as @xmath98^{-1 } ~ \int^{\infty}_0 \frac{1}{(1+z)^4}b_{\nu } \left(\frac{{100\mum}}{1+z},t_{\rm d}\right ) \cr & \times & \kappa_{\rm abs}\left(\frac{{100\mum}}{1+z}\right )   \sigma_{\rm d0}(z)\left(\frac{d_a(z)\theta}{r_{p,0}}\right)^{-\gamma } \frac{dn}{dz}dz .\end{aligned}\ ] ] because we adopt the power - law dust profile , equation ( [ eq : sigma_d ] ) , the ratio of equation ( [ eq : firprof ] ) to ( [ eq : extprof ] ) is independent of @xmath4 , and written in terms of @xmath99 , @xmath93 , and @xmath100 alone . the observed profile of the emission to reddening ratio is shown in figure [ fig : ifir2egi ] . the filled circles are plotted using the residual of the emission profile , from which the best - fit single term and the offset level assuming @xmath101 are subtracted . the red solid curve shows the ratio of the best - fit clustering term , @xmath102 , with @xmath31 to equation ( [ eq : egimsfr ] ) , and the shaded region indicates its uncertainty due to the statistical error of @xmath75 and the amplitude of equation ( [ eq : egimsfr ] ) . the uncertainty of the power - law index in equation ( [ eq : egimsfr ] ) is not considered here . at small @xmath4 , the emission profile is suppressed due to the sfd / iras psf effect , whereas the ratio converges to a constant at large scale . the emission to reddening ratio at large @xmath4 limits is given by equations ( [ eq : egimsfr ] ) and ( [ eq : stackprof ] ) as @xmath103}$ ] , which corresponds to the shaded regions in figure [ fig : td ] below . emission to reddening ratio . filled circles ( black ) indicate the observed @xmath0 emission profile of the stacking analysis divided by the msfr reddening profile , where the best - fit single term @xmath43 and the offset level @xmath37 assuming the 2pcf index as @xmath101 are subtracted . red solid curve is the best - fit profile of the clustering term @xmath97 with @xmath31 , divided by @xmath104 of msfr . shaded region indicates the uncertainty of the emission to reddening ratio where the statistical error of @xmath75 and the msfr measurement is taken into account . crosses ( filled triangles ) and dashed ( dot - dashed ) curve indicate the same as filled circles and solid curve , but for @xmath105 . ] we also consider the extent to which this result is sensitive to the choice of the power - law index @xmath52 , which is fixed as 0.86 in the analysis above . we repeat both the fitting to the observed profile and the theoretical calculation of equation ( [ eq : extprof ] ) and ( [ eq : firprof ] ) , varying the value of @xmath52 from 0.65 to 1.05 . figure [ fig : ifir2egi ] shows the observed emission to reddening ratio for @xmath35 , @xmath106 and @xmath107 . the average ratio changes approximately @xmath108 per cent ( and its fractional uncertainty is similar to that for the case of @xmath31 , although it is not shown in figure [ fig : ifir2egi ] ) . we also make sure that the theoretical value from equation ( [ eq : extprof ] ) and ( [ eq : firprof ] ) changes by @xmath109 per cent according to the corresponding change of @xmath52 . consequently , we find that the uncertainty of dust temperature due to the choice of @xmath52 is merely @xmath110k . this can be neglected comparing with the possible larger systematics due to other many simplifying assumptions .      the solid and dashed lines in figure [ fig : td ] indicate the expected emission to extinction ratio as a function of @xmath100 . we adopt the values of @xmath99 and @xmath93 , from the dust model by @xcite for milky way ( @xmath111 ) and smc dust , for solid and dashed lines , respectively .    here the redshift dependence of @xmath112 is neglected and assumed to be constant just for simplicity . indeed we made sure that the @xmath14-dependence of @xmath112 does not significantly change the result ; if we assume @xmath113 for instance , the model prediction of @xmath114 changes by @xmath115 per cent for @xmath116 , and the dust temperature constraint changes by @xmath117 . the recent measurement of dust mass function by @xcite found that the cosmic dust mass density in sub - mm galaxies rapidly increases with redshift up to @xmath118 . thus the constraint on the dust temperature below may be slightly underestimated .    ) and smc dust model @xcite , respectively . the power - law index of galaxy 2pcf is fixed as @xmath31 . if @xmath35 and @xmath107 is assumed , the allowed region is shifted by @xmath119 and @xmath120 per cent , respectively . ] figure [ fig : td ] indicates that the dust model predictions and the observed region are consistent if @xmath121 for mw dust , and @xmath122 for smc , thus the obtained constraints are almost insensitive to the choice of dust model . given several approximations adopted in our simple model , the quoted statistical errors may underestimate the real uncertainty of the dust temperature . nevertheless it is encouraging that the derived dust temperature is in good agreement with that of the typical cold component of the isd @xcite . while this result is reasonably consistent with the isd model , it is premature to conclude that the observed dust profile is explained by the sum of the dust in the central parts of individual galaxies . our dust model above is based on a single - temperature component , and the extended dust component around a galaxy may have a substantially lower temperature . in this case , the emission flux is much smaller while the reddening amplitude remains almost the same . therefore we consider a two - component dust model below . in order to keep the same surface density profile of dust , we assume that the two components , corresponding to isd and cgd , share the identical spatial distribution , but they are allowed to have different temperatures @xmath123 and @xmath124 . while this is still a very simple model , we would like to proceed with it because the low - angular resolution of iras images make it difficult to distingush the density profile less than @xmath22 . in any case the purpose of the current paper is to propose a new method to constrain the dust density and temperature , which will be improved significantly later theoretically and observationally .    in the above spirit , we replace equation ( [ eq : sigma_d ] ) by @xmath125 \left ( \frac{r_p}{r_{p,0 } } \right)^{-\gamma}.\ ] ] then the observed fir emission to extinction ratio becomes @xmath126_{\rm obs}= \cr & \hspace*{-0.5 cm }   ~\frac{f_{\rm isd } \langle i_{100\mum } \rangle(t_{\rm isd } )   + ( 1-f_{\rm isd } ) \langle i_{100\mum}\rangle ( t_{\rm cgd } ) } { \langle e_{g - i } \rangle } , \end{aligned}\ ] ] at large @xmath4 , where @xmath127 and @xmath128 in the right - hand - side are given by equation ( [ eq : extprof ] ) and ( [ eq : firprof ] ) , respectively . we further assume that the fraction of the isd mass to the total mass : @xmath129 is independent of redshift . thus the observed value of @xmath130 provides a constraint on @xmath131 for given values of @xmath123 and @xmath132 . the preceding analysis corresponds to @xmath133 . the temperature of the cgd is fairly uncertain because of the unknown heating mechanism of the cgd . if the heating source of the cgd is dominated by the cosmic uv background , which is lower than the interstellar radiation field in the solar neighborhood by two orders of magnitude @xcite , we obtain @xmath134 following @xcite . on the other hand , @xcite assume the collisional heating mechanism by hot plasma and the efficient injection of dust grains outside the galactic disk . in this case , they suggested a possibility that the dust temperature reaches even @xmath135 . the abundance of such possible high - temparature cgd , however , is severly constrained by the observed data . @xcite fitted the sed of dust - selected galaxies , and found that the majority of them have cool and warm dust components with @xmath136@xmath137k and @xmath138k . the mass of the cool component is typically 100 times larger than that of the warm component . while the two components may correspond to the two - temperature phases in isd , the estimated mass ratio can be also interpreted to put a severe constraint on the presence of the hot cgd with @xmath139k . furthermore , @xcite reported that the dust temperature near the edge of m31 disk is @xmath140 . thus the dust temperature in the outskirt is naturally expected to be much lower .    for those reasons , we adopt @xmath141 in what follows . we also confirm that the result below does not change as long as @xmath124 is lower than @xmath109k . figure [ fig : fism - td ] shows the constraint on @xmath123 and @xmath131 from the observed value of @xmath142 . due to the strong degeneracy between the two parameters , the constraint allows a wide range of the isd mass fraction , even as small as @xmath143 if @xmath144 . thus the measurement of the mean dust temperature of the central parts of galaxies @xmath123 is crucial in distinguishing the origin of the spatial extension of dust . indeed , the average temperature of the isd varies depending on the properties of the galaxies , and can be as high as @xmath145 @xcite . in this respect , the current data do not exclude a possibility that a substantial amount of the cgd exists , as suggested by msfr and the subsequent studies ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? nevertheless further improvements in model predictions and the observations in future would put more stringent constraints on the spatial extent of dust through the measurement of dust temperature as we proposed in this paper .    , and the mass fraction of the isd to the sum of the isd and cgd . we assume that the cgd temperature as @xmath146 . red curves and blue shaded region indicate the constraint adopting milky way ( @xmath111 ) and smc dust model @xcite , respectively . ] the spatial distribution of dust is of fundamental importance in understanding the star formation and metal circulation history in the universe . it is also crucial in correcting for the magnitude of distant objects due to the resulting reddening / extinction @xcite .    in a previous paper @xcite , we have detected the fir dust emission from sdss galaxies via their image stacking analysis . we found that the amount of dust emission is largely responsible for the observed anomaly in the surface density of sdss galaxies as a function of the sfd extinction @xcite . our previous analysis implicitly assumed that the dust of each galaxy is locally confined in the galactic disk scale , and that the observed fir emission within the large psf width ( fwhm@xmath147 ) is simply given as a sum of contributions of individual galaxies ( corresponding to the isd model in the present paper ) . in contrast , the dust around a galaxy may be indeed spatially extended up to @xmath110mpc ( cgd model ) , as claimed by @xcite and more recently by @xcite through the correlation of background object colors against the separation length of foreground galaxies .    in order to distinguish between the isd and cgd models , we propose a new method that constrains the temperature of dust by combining the absorption ( detected through reddening of quasars ) and emission ( detected through the stacking of galaxies ) features . assuming that the nature of galactic dust is described by those of mw and smc , we find that the observed dust is reasonably explained in terms of isd model if the dust temperature of the central parts of individual galaxies , @xmath123 , is approximately 20k . the estimated temperature is consistent with that of the galactic dust in the central region , but may be higher than that predicted for cgd , if it is heated by uv background alone . on the other hand , the substantial amount of dust may reside far outside the galactic disks if @xmath123 is much higher than 20k . given several simplification and approximations that we adopted in the present simple model analysis , the associated error - bars of the derived dust temperature is fairly uncertain . nevertheless we would like to emphasize that the main purpose of the present paper is to propose a new observational method to diagnose the nature of galactic dust . therefore we do not discuss the interpretation of the present preliminary result . our proposed method should be , and indeed can be , improved in many ways ; the two components of dust may have different spatial density profiles in addition to the different temperatures . the redshift evolution of the temperature and amount of dust may be included in the theoretical models . in addition , the line - of - sights of our emission and reddening measurements may not be exactly the same . since quasars behind the heavily extincted line - of - sights may not be identified in the sdss photometric catalogue , the reddening measurement may systematically underestimate the real optical depths while the emission is largely free from the bias . those improvements of the theoretical models and the effect of the possible selection bias need to be investigated , for instance , with mock simulations , which is beyond the scope of the present paper . the observational data and analysis can be also improved in future . the dust temperature would vary depending on the different properties of galaxies , and the amount of dust emission should depend on the morphology of galaxies . the image stacking analysis with better angular resolutions and in multi - wavelengths would significantly improve the observational data . indeed current result is significantly limited by the poor angular resolution of _ iras_. in those respects , the higher - angular - resolution and multi - band far - infrared data by _ akari _ @xcite are very promising . we plan to present elsewhere more detailed and systematic results using the _ akari _ data ( okabe et al . in preparation ) . we thank brice mnard , bruce t. draine , masato shirasaki , and tetsu kitayama for useful discussions . we also appreciate several comments by an anonymous referee that motivated us to consider the two - temperature dust model as well . this work is supported in part from the grant - in - aid no . 20340041 by the japan society for the promotion of science . y.s . and t.k . gratefully acknowledge supports from the global scholars program of princeton university and from global center for excellence for physical science frontier at the university of tokyo , respectively . funding for the sdss and sdss - ii has been provided by the alfred p. sloan foundation , the participating institutions , the national science foundation , the u.s . department of energy , the national aeronautics and space administration , the japanese monbukagakusho , the max planck society , and the higher education funding council for england . the sdss web site is http://www.sdss.org/.    the sdss and sdss - ii are managed by the astrophysical research consortium for the participating institutions . the participating institutions are the american museum of natural history , astrophysical institute potsdam , university of basel , cambridge university , case western reserve university , university of chicago , drexel university , fermilab , the institute for advanced study , the japan participation group , johns hopkins university , the joint institute for nuclear astrophysics , the kavli institute for particle astrophysics and cosmology , the korean scientist group , the chinese academy of sciences ( lamost ) , los alamos national laboratory , the max - planck - institute for astronomy ( mpia ) , the max - planck - institute for astrophysics ( mpa ) , new mexico state university , ohio state university , university of pittsburgh , university of portsmouth , princeton university , the united states naval observatory , and the university of washington .
Abstract:

Answer: we propose a novel method to constrain the spatial extent of dust around galaxies through the measurement of dust temperature . our method combines the dust emission of galaxies from far - infrared ( fir ) image stacking analysis and the quasar reddening due to the dust absorption around galaxies . as a specific application of our method , we use the stacked fir emission profiles of sdss photometric galaxies over the _ iras _ @xmath0 map , and the recent measurement of the sdss galaxy - quasar cross - correlation . if we adopt a single - temperature dust model , the resulting temperature is around 18k , which is consistent with a typical dust temperature for a central part of galaxies . if we assume an additional dust component with much lower temperature , the current data imply the temperature of the galactic dust needs to be higher , 20k to 30k . since the model of the density and temperature distribution of dust adopted in the current paper is very simple , we can not draw any strong conclusion at this point . nevertheless our novel method with the elaborated theoretical model and multi - band measurement of dust will offer an interesting constraint on the statistical nature of galactic dust . dust  extinction , reddening  large - scale structures  galaxies