#model predictive control

[evenmorecrows]

yknow i dont really have a backup social media if (when, i suppose) tumblr goes down. i guess i could flee to bsky but ive just never enjoyed any kind of twitter-esque layout... i could revitalize my neocities but of course thatd just be My website. i could try to find forums for my interests but these interests change so rapidly thatd id never be anywhere for long.

[robotibilidade]

O que é MPC e Como o Robô Atlas Utiliza Essa Tecnologia?

Model Predictive Control (MPC): A Tecnologia por Trás do Robô Atlas O Model Predictive Control (MPC), ou Controle Preditivo baseado em Modelo, é uma técnica avançada de controle que utiliza modelos matemáticos para prever e otimizar o comportamento de sistemas em tempo real. Essa tecnologia ganhou destaque recentemente com sua aplicação no robô humanoide Atlas, desenvolvido pela Boston…

[simplyforensic]

Persistence of Touch DNA: Understanding the Stability and Implications

Touch DNA, the microscopic genetic material left behind by human touch on surfaces has emerged as a valuable source of evidence in forensic investigations. Recent advancements in DNA analysis techniques have enabled forensic scientists to extract and analyze DNA from touch DNA samples, opening up new possibilities for solving crimes. However, touch DNA’s stability and persistence have remained a…

[mariacallous]

With vaccination rates among US kindergarteners steadily declining in recent years and Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. vowing to reexamine the childhood vaccination schedule, measles and other previously eliminated infectious diseases could become more common. A new analysis published today by epidemiologists at Stanford University attempts to quantify those impacts.

Using a computer model, the authors found that with current state-level vaccination rates, measles could reestablish itself and become consistently present in the United States in the next two decades. Their model predicted this outcome in 83 percent of simulations. If current vaccination rates stay the same, the model estimated that the US could see more than 850,000 cases, 170,000 hospitalizations, and 2,500 deaths over the next 25 years. The results appear in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

“I don’t see this as speculative. It is a modeling exercise, but it’s based on good numbers,” says Jeffrey Griffiths, professor of public health and community medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston, who was not involved in the study. “The big point is that measles is very likely to become endemic quickly if we continue in this way.”

The United States declared measles eliminated in 2000 after decades of successful vaccination campaigns. Elimination means there has been no chain of disease transmission inside a country lasting longer than 12 months. The current measles outbreak in Texas, however, could put that status at risk. With more than 600 cases, 64 hospitalizations, and two deaths, it’s the largest outbreak the state has seen since 1992, when 990 cases were linked to a single outbreak. Nationally, the US has seen 800 cases of measles so far in 2025, the most since 2019. Last year, there were 285 cases.

“We’re really at a point where we should be trying to increase vaccination as much as possible,” says Mathew Kiang, assistant professor of epidemiology and population health at Stanford University and one of the authors of the paper.

Childhood vaccination in the US has been on a downward trend. Data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from state and local vaccination programs found that from the 2019–2020 school year to the 2022–2023 school year, coverage among kindergartners with state-required vaccinations declined from 95 percent to approximately 93 percent. Those vaccines included MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella), DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis), polio, and chickenpox.

In the current study, Kiang and his colleagues modeled each state separately, taking into account their vaccination rates, which ranged from 88 percent to 96 percent for measles, 78 percent to 91 percent for diphtheria, and 90 percent to 97 percent for the polio vaccine. Other variables included demographics of the population, vaccine efficacy, risk of disease importation, typical duration of the infection, the time between exposure and being able to spread the disease, and the contagiousness of the disease, also known as the basic reproduction number. Measles is highly contagious, with one person on average being able to infect 12 to 18 people. The researchers used 12 as the basic reproduction number in their study.

Under a scenario with a 10 percent decline in measles vaccination, the model estimates 11.1 million cases of measles over the next 25 years, while a 5 percent increase in the vaccination rate would result in just 5,800 cases in that same time period.

In addition to measles, the authors used their model to assess the risk of rubella, polio, and diphtheria. The researchers chose these four diseases for their infectiousness and risk of severe complications. While sporadic cases of these diseases do occur and are usually related to international travel, they are no longer endemic in the US, meaning they no longer regularly occur.

The model predicted that rubella, polio, and diphtheria are unlikely to become endemic under current levels of vaccination. Rubella and polio have a basic reproduction number of four, while diphtheria’s is less than three. In 81 percent of simulations, vaccination rates would need to fall by around 35 percent for rubella to become endemic in the next 25 years. Polio, meanwhile, had a 50 percent chance of becoming endemic if vaccination rates dropped 40 percent. Diphtheria was the least likely disease to become reestablished.

“Any of these diseases, under the right conditions, could come back,” says coauthor Nathan Lo, a Stanford physician and assistant professor of infectious diseases.

To evaluate the validity of the model, the researchers ran a scenario with recent state-level vaccine coverage rates over a five-year period and found that the number of model-predicted cases broadly aligned with the number of observed cases in those years. The authors also found that Texas was at the highest risk for measles.

One limitation of the study was that the model assumed that vaccination rates were the same across all communities within a state. It didn’t take into account large variations in vaccination levels. Pockets of low vaccination rates, like in the Mennonite community at the center of the West Texas outbreak, would likely lead to local outbreaks that are larger than expected given the overall vaccination rate.

The study also didn’t take into account the possibility that vaccination rates could rebound in an area in response to an outbreak. “That’s the thing that we have control over. If you’re able to change that cycle, then that disease won’t spread anymore,” says Mujeeb Basit, associate chief of the Clinical Informatics Center at UT Southwestern Medical Center, who wasn’t involved in the study.

Kiang and Lo say the full impact of decreased vaccination will likely not be seen for decades. “It’s important to note that it’s totally feasible that vaccinations go down and nothing happens for a little while. That’s actually what the model says,” Kiang says. “But eventually, these things are going to catch up to us.”

[tanadrin]

Can you explain in what what you think eugenics doesn't work? Does this basically boil down to skepticism about the accuracy of GWAS studies? My understanding is that academic consensus is "G probably exists, disentangling direct genetic inheritance vs genetic cultural inheritance is complicated but possible, we can identify a number of alleles which we're reasonably confident are directly causally involved in having a higher G factor"

when it comes to intelligence, its heritability, and its variation at the population level, my understanding of the science is:

highly adaptive traits don't, in fact, vary much at the genetic level between populations of a species because they are strongly selected for. in an environment where a trait is being strongly selected for, a population that failed to express that trait strongly will be rapidly outcompeted.

intelligence is probably the quintessential such trait for humans. we have sacrificed a great deal of other kinds of specialization in favor of our big brains. we spend an enormous amount of calories supporting those brains. tool use, the ability to plan for the future, the ability to navigate complex social situations and hierarchies in order to secure status, the ability to model the minds of others for the purposes of cooperation and deception means that we should expect intelligence to be strongly selected for for as long as our lineage has been social and tool-using, which is at least the last three million years or so.

so, at least as a matter of a priori assumptions, we should expect human populations not to vary greatly in their genetic predisposition to intelligence. it may nonetheless, but we'd need pretty strong evidence. i think i read this argument on PZ Myers' blog a million years ago, so credit where that's due.

complicating the picture is that we just don't have good evidence for how IQ does vary across populations, even before we get into the question of "how much of this variation is genetic and how much of it is not." the cross-national data on which a lot of IQ arguments have been based is really bad. and that would be assuming IQ tests are in fact good at capturing a notion of IQ that is independent of cultural context, which historically they're pretty bad at

this screed by nassim nicholas taleb (not a diss; AFAICT the guy only writes in screeds) makes a number of arguments, but one argument I find persuasive is that IQ is really only predictive of achievement in the sense that it does usefully discriminate between people with obvious intellectual disabilities and those without--but you do not actually need an IQ test for that sort of thing, any more than you need to use a height chart to figure out who is missing both their legs. in that sense, sure, IQ is predictive of a lot of things. but once you remove this group, the much-vaunted correlations between IQ and stuff like wealth just straight-up vanishes

heritability studies are a useful tool, but a tool which must be wielded carefully; they were developed for studying traits which were relatively easy to isolate in very specific populations, like a crop under study at an agricultural research site, and are more precarious when applied to, e.g., human populations

my understanding based on jonathan kaplan articles like this one is that twin studies are not actually that good at distinguishing heritable factors from environmental ones--they have serious limitations compared to heritability studies where you actually can rigorously control for environmental effects, like you can with plants or livestock.

as this post also points out, heritability studies also only examine heritability within groups, and are not really suited to examining large-scale population differences, *especially* in the realm of intelligence where there is a huge raft of confounding factors, and a lack of a really robust measurement tool.

(if we are worried about intelligence at the population level, it seems to me there are interventions we know are going to be effective and do not rely on deeply dubious scientific speculation, e.g., around nutrition and healthcare and serious wealth inequality and ofc education; and if what people actually want is to raise the average intelligence of the population rather than justify discrimination against minorities, then they might focus on those much more empirically grounded interventions. even if population differences in IQ are real and significant and point to big differences in intelligence, we know those things are worth a fair few IQ points. but most people who are or historically have been the biggest advocates for eugenics are, in my estimation, mostly interested in justifying discrimination.)

i think the claims/application of eugenics extend well beyond just intelligence, ftr. eugenics as an ideology is complex and historically pretty interesting, and many eugenicists have made much broader claims than just "population-level differences in intelligence exist due to genetic factors, and we should try to influence them with policy," but that is a useful point for them to fall back onto when pressed on those other claims. but i don't think even that claim is at all well-supported.

[reasonsforhope]

"A team at Northwestern University has come up with the term “dancing molecules” to describe an invention of synthetic nanofibers which they say have the potential to quicken the regeneration of cartilage damage beyond what our body is capable of.

The moniker was coined back in November 2021, when the same team introduced an injection of these molecules to repair tissues and reverse paralysis after severe spinal cord injuries in mice.

Now they’ve applied the same therapeutic strategy to damaged human cartilage cells. In a new study, published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society, the treatment activated the gene expression necessary to regenerate cartilage within just four hours.

And, after only three days, the human cells produced protein components needed for cartilage regeneration, something humans can’t do in adulthood.

The conceptual mechanisms of the dancing molecules work through cellular receptors located on the exterior of the cell membrane. These receptors are the gateways for thousands of compounds that run a myriad of processes in biology, but they exist in dense crowds constantly moving about on the cell membrane.

The dancing molecules quickly form synthetic nanofibers that move according to their chemical structure. They mimic the extracellular matrix of the surrounding tissue, and by ‘dancing’ these fibers can keep up with the movement of the cell receptors. By adding biological signaling receptors, the whole assemblage can functionally move and communicate with cells like natural biology.

“Cellular receptors constantly move around,” said Northwestern Professor of Materials Sciences Samuel Stupp, who led the study. “By making our molecules move, ‘dance’ or even leap temporarily out of these structures, known as supramolecular polymers, they are able to connect more effectively with receptors.”

The target of their work is the nearly 530 million people around the globe living with osteoarthritis, a degenerative disease in which tissues in joints break down over time, resulting in one of the most common forms of morbidity and disability.

“Current treatments aim to slow disease progression or postpone inevitable joint replacement,” Stupp said. “There are no regenerative options because humans do not have an inherent capacity to regenerate cartilage in adulthood.”

In the new study, Stupp and his team looked to the receptors for a specific protein critical for cartilage formation and maintenance. To target this receptor, the team developed a new circular peptide that mimics the bioactive signal of the protein, which is called transforming growth factor beta-1 (TGFb-1).

Northwestern U. Press then reported that the researchers incorporated this peptide into two different molecules that interact to form supramolecular polymers in water, each with the same ability to mimic TGFb-1...

“With the success of the study in human cartilage cells, we predict that cartilage regeneration will be greatly enhanced when used in highly translational pre-clinical models,” Stupp said. “It should develop into a novel bioactive material for regeneration of cartilage tissue in joints.”

“We are beginning to see the tremendous breadth of conditions that this fundamental discovery on ‘dancing molecules’ could apply to,” Stupp said. “Controlling supramolecular motion through chemical design appears to be a powerful tool to increase efficacy for a range of regenerative therapies.”"

-via Good News Network, August 5, 2024

[ayeonz]

not enough people talking about the new Black Mirror episode Common People that shit was nauseating

the endlessly increasing subscription model just to have control of your life, paralleling obviously the greed-induced enshittification of all subscription-based services lately but also the healthcare system's price-gouging on medications so many disabled people rely on to live

constantly teetering over the edge of total poverty because of it, the husband literally defiling himself to make ends meet all for it to backfire and come crashing down on their heads, just for a $500 tip they so desperately needed

the wife never even having a say in the procedure, or the upgrades her husband bought her, her life completely upended by something that was never her fault and she had no control over. destroying her happiness, her livelihood, her sleep, her relationships, her finances. spending hundreds of dollars every month just to be normal

the total existential horror of happiness never being within reach for long, trapping you into paying more and more money for something that was never truly worth it — but without it everything is worse. and at the end of it they had nothing left. there was no way forward but to die.

i can't even continue the season i just keep thinking about this episode. the plot may have been predictable but the message is too close to home

[picontrols]

Bridging the Skill Gap with Process Control Simulation Training

"Why is it so hard to find skilled workers for industrial automation?"

"How do we train new employees without risking downtime or safety?"

"Is there a way to upskill our team without pulling them off active projects?" If you've ever asked these questions, you're not alone. The skills gap in industrial sectors—especially in process control and automation—is a growing concern for plant managers, HR teams, and training coordinators. The good news? Process control simulation training is becoming a game-changer. It's not just about learning theory; it's about giving your team hands-on experience in a risk-free, highly realistic environment. In this blog, let's explore how process control simulation training is helping companies bridge the skills gap, boost productivity, and future-proof their workforce.

🔧 What Is Process Control Simulation Training?

Process control simulation training uses software-based tools (and sometimes hardware-integrated systems) to simulate real-world industrial processes, such as chemical reactions, fluid flow, heating systems, or batch operations.

Employees interact with digital twins of systems rather than learning on a live plant or production line (which can be costly and risky). They can also practice controlling variables and troubleshoot simulated failures in a controlled and safe learning space.

📉 The Reality of the Skills Gap

Here's the harsh truth: as experienced engineers retire and tech continues to evolve, there's a growing mismatch between what employers need and what job seekers can do.

According to various industry reports:

Over 50% of manufacturers say they struggle to find qualified talent.

Many graduates enter the workforce without practical exposure to control systems, instrumentation, or advanced automation.

On-the-job training often means learning under pressure, which increases risk and slows down productivity.

That's where process control simulation comes in to level the playing field.

💡 Why Simulation Training Works So Well

Let's break it down—why is simulation training such a powerful tool for skill development?

1. Hands-On Without the Risk

Operators and engineers can learn to manage pumps, valves, sensors, and PID controllers without shutting down an actual plant or risking equipment failure.

✅ Outcome: Teams gain confidence and skills faster, without the anxiety of making real-world mistakes.

2. Real-Time Feedback and Learning

Simulation platforms offer instant feedback so learners can see every decision's cause and effect. Did a parameter spike? Was the valve response too slow? The trainee can adjust, repeat, and refine.

✅ Outcome: Faster learning curves and better problem-solving abilities.

3. Customized to Industry Needs

Whether you're in oil and gas, food processing, pharmaceuticals, or energy, process control simulation training can be tailored to match the systems your team uses every day.

✅ Outcome: No more generic training—only relevant, job-specific practice.

4. Supports All Experience Levels

From entry-level technicians to experienced engineers learning new platforms, simulation training fulfills people where they are.

✅ Outcome: Continuous professional development becomes scalable.

🧠 What Skills Are Developed?

Here are just a few areas where process control simulation builds competence:

Instrument calibration

Process variable tuning (temperature, flow, pressure)

PLC and SCADA integration

Alarming and fault detection

Start-up and shutdown procedures

Troubleshooting under abnormal conditions

It also enhances soft skills like decision-making, attention to detail, and collaboration using group-based simulations.

🏭 Real-World Benefits for Companies

Let's not forget the big picture—this isn't just a learning tool. It's a strategic investment.

✔️ Shorter onboarding time for new hires

✔️ Reduced operational downtime from human error

✔️ Higher retention and employee satisfaction

✔️ Stronger compliance with safety regulations

✔️ Better preparedness for automation upgrades

Companies using process control simulation in their training programs are more agile, efficient, and better positioned for growth.

🚀 Getting Started with Simulation Training

Are you ready to close the skills gap in your team? Here's how to begin:

Choose the right platform – 

Look for simulation tools like Simulink, DCS emulators, or virtual PLC trainers.

Assess your team's needs – 

Identify the processes or skills most needing improvement.

Design a structured training path – 

Combine simulations with assessments and guided instruction.

Track progress – 

Use KPIs to measure learning outcomes and improvements over time.

Encourage a culture of learning –

 Make training constant, not just a one-time event.

Final Thoughts

Bridging the skill gap doesn't have to mean expensive hires or risky learning curves. With simulation training in process control, you can quickly, safely, and effectively give your team the necessary skills. As industries evolve, the companies that invest in their people through innovative training tools will be the ones that lead the way. So, if you're ready to turn your team into top-tier operators and problem-solvers, process control simulation might be your best bet. Count on skilled software developers of PiControl Solutions LLC to design and implement tools for process control simulation and train your team.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Ideas: 170 Character Quirks

Quirk—a peculiar trait; idiosyncrasy; memorable little things about a character’s personality that make them charming, endearing, weird, or unique; can be cute habits; is anything worth describing about a character.

PERSONALITY QUIRKS

Very introverted, quiet and reserved, keeps to themselves

Highly extroverted, loves socializing and meeting new people

Mega control freak who has to have everything their way

Neat freak (often coincides with control freak)

Total slob who never knows where anything is

Super stubborn and will never admit when they’re wrong

Brutally honest and can’t lie to save their life

Extremely judgmental of other people

Short-tempered, especially when irritated

Always patient, even when frustrated

Hilarious or odd sense of humor

Very hard to make them laugh

Loves to eat and is obsessed with food

Loves to drink and is constantly partying

Constantly complains about everything

Extremely loyal and will do anything for their friends/family

Adventurous and willing to try anything

Cautious and careful no matter what

Energetic, hardly ever needs to rest

Sleeps all the time and still gets tired during the day

Horrible sense of direction and constantly gets lost

Overachiever who loves school/structure

Really modest and won’t ever brag about themselves

Extremely emotional and will cry at the drop of a hat

Stoic and detached, rarely shows emotion

Wildcard whose behavior is unpredictable, even to their friends

Notoriously two-faced and will betray anyone

Charismatic and can convince anyone to do their bidding

Very proper and always polite to others

Dates tons of people and has a new boyfriend or girlfriend every week

Obsessive personality — whether it’s a TV show, brand, musical artist, or even another person, they’ll get attached and think/talk about it constantly

PHYSICAL QUIRKS

Unique eye or hair color

Has two different eye colors

Extremely short or tall

Some discerning physical mark — birthmark, freckles, mole, or scar

Wears unusual glasses

Has braces and headgear

Large feet — may mean they’re clumsy

Bites their nails/lips or chews on their hair

Constantly fidgeting and can’t sit still

Acne, eczema, or other skin problems

Many tattoos or piercings

Often sick or has allergies (constantly sniffling/blowing their nose)

Talks very loudly or quietly

Says everything like it’s a question

Terrible breath — may be a coffee drinker

Gets sweaty easily (especially when nervous)

Unusually hairy arms or legs

Very long painted nails

Always wears a faceful of makeup

Has a stutter or other speech impediment

Incessantly clicks a pen

Often tucks their hair behind their ears

Constantly chews gum

Has a toothpick dangling from their mouth

Always picking their teeth

Smokes and has a raspy voice

Breathes heavily or snores

Is extremely muscular

Walks very slowly or quickly

Left-handed or ambidextrous

Constantly scratching themselves

Has some noticeable physical tic, like a twitch

Always wears a distinct item of clothing or accessory — a favorite pair of socks, a lucky jersey, or even a particular shade of lipstick

STRENGTHS/TALENTS

Fantastic cook or baker

Skilled musician (piano, guitar, violin, etc.)

Artistic talent (drawing, painting, sculpting, etc.)

Model athlete (football, hockey, swimming, etc.)

Great at voices/ventriloquy

Can do sleight-of-hand — may be a pickpocket

Speaks multiple languages, even obscure ones

Knows everything about history

Mathematical or scientific genius

Brilliant coder and can hack into any database

Skilled mechanical inventor

Can build or put together anything

Super-quick logical reasoning

Exceptional memory/genius IQ (several of the above might fall under this)

Special connection with animals

Super empathetic and understanding of other people

Extremely fast runner

Contortionist (can twist their body into any shape)

Psychic talent (can predict the future)

Amazing mechanic

Super strength, flying, invisibility or other superpowers

Unusually high tolerance for pain

Survival skills like hunting and fishing

Quick reflexes, acts fast in a crisis

Brave and fearless, not scared of anything

Able to talk their way out of any trouble/invent stories on the fly

WEAKNESSES/NEGATIVE TRAITS

Awful driver

Always running late

Illegible handwriting

Terrible at public speaking

Socially awkward — hard for them to make friends

Has tons of credit card debt from online shopping

Self-destructive and always wants what’s worst for them

Gets blackout drunk every time they go out

Extremely conceited or arrogant

Compulsive liar

Manipulative of friends

Gets jealous over nothing

Often mean for no reason

Unbelievably self-centered

Extremely passive-aggressive

Is a hero who doesn’t like using their superpowers

Arachnophobia (irrational fear of spiders)

Coulrophobia (irrational fear of clowns)

Agoraphobia (irrational fear of leaving the house)

Pantophobia (fear of everything)

COMMONLY USED QUIRKS

Pale skin

Crooked smile

“Intense” stare

Relentless clumsiness

Artificial hair colors that are supposedly natural

Characters thinking they’re unattractive when everyone else thinks they’re beautiful

OTHER QUIRKS

Dresses all in one color

Bedroom is decorated exactly like a Pinterest picture

Won’t drink still water, only sparkling

Refuses to use headphones and blasts their music in public

Always dresses too nicely for the occasion

Walks around barefoot, even in stores and other public places

Hates being inside, sleeps and goes to the bathroom outdoors

Can’t help but look in every mirror they pass

Wears a small plastic backpack everywhere

Preps their meals three weeks in advance

Drinks shots of espresso all day long

Sings opera in the shower

Always sneezes around pets

Has a collection of something mundane

Makes their own (terrible) abstract art and hangs it on their walls

Gets super excited about Christmas and then really depressed in January

Refuses to wear glasses even though they need them

Carries around a secret teddy bear

Has been wearing the same friendship bracelet for three years

Fastidiously lint-rolls all their clothing

Will leave a shop or restaurant if someone walks in with a baby

Extremely superstitious (knocks on wood, avoids the number 13, etc.)

Drops everything other people ask them to hold

Likes to go out dancing by themselves

Prefers to have the lights off or dimmed at all times

Only reads books written before 1900

Only watches movies that get really bad reviews

Always wears multiple sweaters on top of each other

Won’t eat anything that doesn’t have bread (at least on the side)

Thinks they’re a time-traveler from the medieval era

Gives friends and family excellent homemade presents

Leaves the office last every day so they can push all the chairs in

Hates jagged numbers (always fills their gas tank to the dollar, sends emails on the hour, etc.)

Has an imaginary friend they still talk to, even in adulthood

Owns a lizard that they try and use as a guard dog

Listens exclusively to Britney Spears

Leaves little notes in library books for future readers

Uses tissues to hold onto poles on public transportation

Wears their hair in Princess Leia buns

Never goes a day without talking to their mom

Hums “In the Hall of the Mountain King” when they get stressed

Clucks their tongue while walking, so they sound like a horse

Quotes Pulp Fiction all the time

Loves hanging out in completely empty places

Convinced they’re going to die in a freak accident

Grows all their own food in their vegetable garden

Never pays for train or bus tickets

Can recite Shakespearean sonnets

Recycles and eats vegetarian, but only out of guilt

Has a “vision board” posted on their ceiling

Loves the beach but hates swimming

Flicks people in the forehead when they get annoyed

Laughs at everything, even bad jokes

Curates a great Instagram feed of street art

Sources: 1 2 ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

[conflictofthemind]

Thoughts on "Escape from Camazotz"

Oppressive Suburbia, Conformity, and Season 5 Themes

I've long thought that a major focus of Season 5 will be the contrast between the families of The Wheelers and The Byers, and exploring how non-traditional family environments can be freeing vs the oppressive structure of the nuclear family.

In a Wrinkle In Time, Camazotz is a planet controlled by the big bad of the book, the "IT", who forces the citizens into a conformity that resembles American suburbia. All of the houses the same, the citizens the same, doing the same things at the same time without individual identity. Without anything different. Different means a lot of things, but with Stranger Things dropping different in reference to Will's identity and the presumable themes of this season, it will heavily codify as queerness and how it threatens the cisheterosexual family model.

Henry was raised in the 1950s, a decade still revered by conservatives for it's traditional family dynamics that supposedly were the peak of culture and happiness for all. That was all a lie, of course, and Henry knew so as he shows to Nancy and Eleven during his monologue. The second most conservative decade aside from the 1950s in American society is widely considered to be the 1980s.

The Creels will serve in parallel to The Wheelers; the worst example of what they could become and the damage that this type of family could do to a child that is different in any way. Notice how Vecna selectively shows Nancy visions of The Wheelers dying, but not anyone else she may consider family or friends (like Jonathan).

That is; unless they change their ways and come together as a healthy functioning family facing their traumas, The Wheelers will be toast.

Karen has been moved up to a main character role this season. Ted's actor says the father starts to show up more for Holly (hold that) and realizes he wants to act differently. Holly has been recast. Finn has said Mike goes on a much more personal journey this season, and steps up as a leader.

Oh, also: the catalyst for all of this is that Holly goes missing. The contrast will help show how the Byers (including El and Hopper here) were able to pull together and help solve Will's disappearance, versus how the Wheelers as a closed off nuclear family grapple with Holly's vanishing.

Each of the Byers is in some kind of a non-1950s conformist relationship, but particularly Will (not in one now but we all know he will be). I think El might represent, after she breaks up with Mike, the fear of the unmarried woman being satisfied without a husband. The above shot really emphasizes my point.

I predict that Will will end up coming out to his family rather early on, and we will see all of them immediately accept him with little surprise or push-back. Will is a visible gay man who comes from an open minded non traditional family (divorced, non-married, adoptive) that is willing to have honest conversations.

But this theme will place the most focus on the Wheelers. Mike is the main character of said family and this will particularly focus on his arc, and his acceptance of his queerness in the midst of suburban conformity.

He is not visible, he comes from a Reagan-supporting family who don't communicate with each other. He is not particularly close with his family like Will is. He pushes his feelings down and tries his damn hardest to be normal despite it all. His trauma hasn't really been addressed at all. He is falling back into his usual habits - the one thing he dared to do different (grow his hair long) has gone back to how it was.

It's not all doom and gloom though. This season above all will be a redemption arc of the American nuclear family, how they choose to escape their conformity and learn to be there for each other, thus overpowering Vecna. Not that the Wheelers are going to end this personally.

"Great, more hysteria. Just what we need". "It's the news, now indistinguishable from the tabloids".

[drdemonprince]

Between 500 to 1,000 study subjects were recruited from each of the 23 countries sampled in Napier’s study, for a total number of 16,756 participants. Each participant was asked to report their attitudes toward transgender women and transgender men on scale from 1 to 9, with 1 representing “extremely positive” feelings, and 9 representing “extremely negative” feelings. Attitudes toward gay men and lesbians were also recorded, to echo the Bettinsoli et al 2020 paper that Napier’s work builds upon.

In addition to reporting their feelings toward trans and gay people, Napier’s survey respondents were also asked whether they believed it was possible for a person to be a gender other than the one assigned to them at birth (Napier calls this a “gender identity denial" measure), and to report their religiosity, conservatism, age, and education level. Region of course was also a crucial variable in the study, and so analyses are performed both on the level of individual country, and pooled in order to draw comparisons between Western- and non-Western people.

The first important finding to flag here is that, when collapsed across all countries sampled, participants were consistently more biased against trans women than they were trans men.

When isolating survey respondents by region, however, Napier found that non-Westerners reported a greater bias against trans women. Participants in Western nations still appear to have greater dislike for trans women than trans men, on average, but when isolated by region, the pattern did not reach the level of statistical significance. As in her previous analyses, Napier found that the men in her sample were more biased against trans individuals overall, compared to women, and that non-Western men were particularly prejudiced.

Next, Napier turned her focus to the measure of “gender identity denial” — which asked participants where it is possible for a person to be a gender other than the one they were considered at birth.

Participants from Russia, China, India, Peru, Hungary, South Africa, Poland, and the United States disagreed the most strongly with the idea that a person’s gender can change, of all the 23 countries sampled. Spain, a nation that offers hormone replacement therapy on an informed consent basis, ranked as far and away the least transphobic region in the sample, with respondents generally considering it possible for a person to change their gender identity from what they were considered at birth.

After this, Napier combined attitudes toward both trans women and trans men to compute an overall measure of transphobic attitudes, and built a model examining the effects of all variables in the study, as well as how those variables interacted with one another. Once again, she discovered that men feel more negatively toward trans people than women do, and that non-Western men, in particular, expressed greater transphobia.

Napier also discovered that more highly educated people were generally less transphobic, regardless of region. Older people, on average, were more biased against trans people, and this effect was heightened in non-Western countries. Conservatism was associated with more transphobic bias, particularly in Western countries such as the United States. In Western countries, higher religiosity predicted greater transphobia, though it did not in non-Western countries.

So far, these results mostly line up with Napier’s predictions, and most of the existing social psychological literature on the subject. Nothing super surprising here. Where things get a little more complicated, though, is in step two of the analyses, where Napier entered attitudes toward gay men and lesbians as a control.

After controlling for attitudes toward gay people, younger people were actually found to be more transphobic than elders in the Western countries in the sample. What this means, in essence, is that for older people in countries like the United States, attitudes toward gay people and trans people pretty much hang together: either you accept all LGBTQ individuals, or you don’t.

But among the younger generations, homophobia and transphobia are somewhat more independent. Perhaps on account of rising transphobic rhetoric, a sizeable number of young people in Western countries support gays but strongly dislike trans people. The LGB without the T movement sadly seems to have found some converts among the newer generations.

When controlling for attitudes towards gays and lesbians, the effect of education and conservatism on transphobia largely dropped away. This suggests that more educated people are more tolerant towards both gays and trans folks (which is not super surprising), and that conservatives are less tolerant toward both (also a pretty predictable result).

The effects of religion however, flipped: when controlling for anti-gay bias, highly religious people were actually less biased against trans folks than the non-religious were.

This suggests there’s a contingent of highly religious people who are more tolerant toward trans people than they are gay people. This may indicate they believe that transness, which is a matter of identity or personal feeling, is not a choice or not sinful, whereas being gay is. Since some religious doctrines preach specifically about the evils of gay sex, it’s possible some highly religious individuals view transness more neutrally. But truthfully, more study would be needed to tease this effect apart.

Finally, Napier examined the relationship between “gender identity denial” and general transphobia. She found that people who do not believe it’s possible to change one’s gender are in fact more transphobic (no surprise there), and that a person’s beliefs about the changeability of gender had an influence on transphobia that was statistically independent of homophobia.

In other words, transphobia isn’t just the result of homophobic people applying their bigotry to all members of the LGBTQ umbrella equally — rather, transphobia reflects, in some part, a person’s ideology about what gender is and whether it is changeable.

This might not sound like it’s a big deal, but it suggests that the rhetoric of TERFs, “gender critical activists,” and far-right transphobes about the immutability of gender might have had an influence on public attitudes over the years. People who hate trans folks aren’t just doing it because they hate all queers — they’ve developed specifically transphobic beliefs about how the world operates. Transphobes are therefore not merely “ignorant” about what trans people are — they know about us, and they have constructed a worldview that deliberately shuts us out and makes them more biased against us.

I wrote about an impactful new study on the public's attitudes toward trans women and trans men across the globe -- you can read my full write-up and critique of the study (or have it narrated to you by the Substack app) at drdevonprice.substack.com

[mysticalcrowntyrant]

Hello hello! I’ve been OBSESSED with your writing and it’s so good, my head goes BRR

I wonder if it would be okay if perhaps you could do a people pleaser MC who’s essentially very dedicated to filling tasks or requests, both inside and outside of work, even in the personal life. The Yandere essentially catches wind of it after seeing just how far the lengths go and manipulates it both in their favor while also encouraging rest and recharging. A double edged sword where the Yandere wants the pleasing to be for them but also let darling have a recharge.

Sorry this took me so long!!

You were, by all outward appearances, the dream employee, the ideal friend, the model partner—even to people you weren’t actually dating. If someone asked for help moving apartments, you showed up an hour early with coffee. If a coworker missed a deadline, you stayed late and filed the report without asking for credit. If a neighbor's dog needed walking, you rearranged your schedule, never complained, and even picked up specialty treats on the way. Your phone was a cascade of unread messages, all asking something of you, and you answered every single one. Always.

There was something soothing in it, the predictability of being needed. It gave your life shape, form, importance. A purpose. Every "thank you" was a small reassurance that you hadn’t wasted your day, hadn’t wasted yourself.

But of course, it took its toll.

You were always tired. Not the kind of tired that a nap or a weekend could fix, but the bone-deep fatigue that creeps in when you never say no, when your worth becomes synonymous with service. Your shoulders slumped even when you smiled. Your phone vibrated, and you flinched. Your apartment was clean—but only after a friend mentioned they'd be stopping by.

They noticed it first. They noticed you first, really. They watched you refill someone’s coffee at work like it was second nature. Noticed how your fingers trembled slightly as you massaged your temple while answering an eighth back-to-back favor over text. You weren’t doing it for attention. That’s what made it so genuine. That’s what made you so dangerous to yourself—and so irresistible.

At first, they simply made themselves part of the background. A supportive coworker, an innocuous neighbor, maybe a classmate if you were in school. They inserted themselves like a bookmark into your day, gently noting which requests you accepted, which ones you stumbled under, and—more importantly—which ones you never denied.

It became a game, of sorts.

"Hey, can you help me carry this box?"

Of course you did.

"Would you mind reviewing my proposal tonight?"

No problem. Midnight was still technically today.

But one day, they broke the rhythm.

"You’ve done so much for everyone else lately. I want you to rest tonight. Just rest. For me."

And of course, you did. For the first time, you took a long bath instead of answering emails. Ate dinner while it was still warm. Slept without an alarm.

The next morning, they smiled sweetly. "See? Doesn’t that feel better? You're no good to anyone burnt out. Least of all to me."

That was the start of the double-edged sword.

You, ever the pleaser, couldn’t deny the earnest tone, couldn’t resist the gentle push to care for yourself—especially not when it was framed as another form of service. Rest, because I want you to be okay. Because I need you to be strong—for me.

And so, the manipulation deepened. They made themselves the center of your orbit, cloaking control in kindness.

"Skip helping with the community cleanup. They won’t appreciate it like I do."

"Don’t exhaust yourself on their problems. Let them fail. I’d never let you drown like that."

"You don’t need to fix everything. Just be mine. Be well. Be whole. That’s what I want."

So you began to withdraw—gently, quietly—from the world. Your phone still buzzed, but you turned it face-down. You still smiled, but mostly at them. Because suddenly, pleasing someone didn’t hurt. It didn’t leave you hollow. It left you seen. Valued. Loved.

Of course, you didn’t see the subtle tracking apps, the ghosted messages they intercepted, the small favors "accidentally" sabotaged so others would stop relying on you. You didn’t question why you had more free time lately—or why it was always spent under their watchful eye.

And them? They were content, in a twisted, possessive way. Because they encouraged the rest. They were a good influence. They made you healthy again. But only in their arms, only in their world.

"You don’t have to be everything for everyone. Just be mine. That’s enough."

And you, who had never felt like enough, finally believed it.

Masterlist

[glassbirdfeather]

Mohg's Brain

(This is an essay on Mohg, Lord of Blood, from hit video game Elden Ring. It just takes a bit to get there.)

There is a story often repeated in Psychology classes, Physiology classes, pop psych media like YouTube, podcasts, and garbage daytime television on channels that used to be scientifically rigorous: about a man with an incredible brain injury. For those of you who haven't heard the story or are not yet sick of hearing it, I've included it from memory below, because I have heard it just that many times.

If you've heard this story already, you can skip to the subtitle: "Can We Even Learn Anything From Gage?"

If you already know the controversies about Phineas Gage or just want to jump to the part about the video game character, you can skip to the subtitle: "Let's FINALLY talk about Video Game"

----

"The Curious Case of Phineas Gage"

Phineas Gage was a railroad worker who would help clear land with explosives. The dubious and definitely wouldn't-have-been-OSHA-approved method of laying these explosives was to chip a hole into the mountainside, place the explosives, and then tamp it down using some sort of implement like a railroad spike. What happened next was predictable and it's surprising this didn't happen much more often--when packing the explosives, they detonated in Gage's face. Specifically, this launched the spike underneath his left eye and out of the top of his head. Less predictably, Phineas stood up afterwards. When a doctor arrived, said doctor did not believe what had occurred until Gage vomited approximately a "teacupful of brain matter" onto the street.

Due to lack of effective sterilization and antibiotics at the time, poor Phineas Gage was bedridden for several months, where he continued to lose further brain matter to infection. Eventually, he did recover, although he would continue to experience migraines and seizures for the rest of his life. While he lost his job for the railroad service, he went on to work in a sideshow attraction, carrying around the very railroad spike that went through his head. Eventually, he got a job and worked as a taxi driver and lived for several more years before dying of a seizure.

Phineas Gage was never the same after this life-altering injury: he was belligerent, drunk, lied frequently, and lost his job for the railroad company because of his new personality. And I do say NEW personality--Phineas had become like a completely different person and was, in essence, "no longer Gage" (they love quoting that). The damage to regions of the prefrontal cortex made him unable to make moral judgements, and impaired his impulse control.

OR MAYBE THAT LAST PART ISN'T TRUE.

Phineas Gage was NOT much changed by this life-altering injury. Though he lost his job at the railway company, the cause of this job loss is unknown. He MAY have had severe alterations to his personality due to this injury, but whether these changes were due to physical damage or emotional trauma--or whether personality changes ACTUALLY occurred at all--are disputed.

----

Can We Even Learn Anything From Gage?

Though I am uncertain if we have exact data on which parts of his brain he was left with when accounting for what was later lost to infection, the trajectory and angle of the injury suggests he initially lost much of his prefrontal cortex. Which of the previous versions of the story are told or over/under-emphasized is dependent on the point the teller is trying to make in the age-old debate of nature vs. nurture.

Some psychologists argue that Gage's personality change demonstrates the Global Workspace Model, where different parts of the brain are responsible for different parts of consciousness, and that by changing or removing parts of the brain, you change consciousness.

Other psychologists will argue that the LACK of change is evidence of the brain's incredible plasticity--its ability to adapt and compensate for missing parts by shifting the functions of those parts to be performed by different regions.

Most reasonably, he probably experienced some cognitive differences while still being effectively the same person and is an example of both points of view. But we don't have concrete enough evidence to say.

Any class in which a teacher or textbook needs evidence to support whatever point they're trying to make about how changes to the brain affects personality, addiction, emotional regulation, decision making, etc., they'll use Gage to make that point, no matter what stance they take. So really, Gage isn't a useful case study beyond what we could actually observe: he lost some of his brain and lived, while also experiencing migraines and seizures for the rest of his life.

With all of that said, if we assume that Gage experienced no changes to cognitive function or personality, I just typed out a story I am very sick of hearing for no reason. So let's assume that at least some of those observations were true.

----

Let's FINALLY Talk About Video Game

Her are some potentially useful images to reference if you want. Left: general brain regions and their functions. Right: paranasal sinus cavities.

Unlike a nice, straight tamping iron, Mohg's horns curl in unpredictable directions. Some assumptions must be made about length, depth, and diameter to determine what region and volume of his skull is occupied by his horn. The minimum I expect is that the horn occupies the region of his frontal lobe in any scenario. Let's also set a maximum limit: I believe it is reasonable to assume it has not reached the primary motor cortex, where it would disrupt body control and physical movement... unless one wants to suggest he is puppetting himself in his boss fight like a bloodbender. Which, let's be real, IS a really badass concept, someone should write that fanfiction.

Though I argue that Gage is a bad example to use given our lack of reliable data on his personality and lived experiences, we DO know that disrupting the function of the prefrontal cortex can affect judgment, planning, concentration, and any type of higher processing you might call a uniquely 'human' mental ability (I acknowledge the mental abilities of birds and primates but they are beyond the scope of this essay). It may be safe to assume that, in Mohg's case, these mental processes are harmed regardless of any further extrapolation I make. One other brain region of note is the motor speech (Broca) area, located on the left side directly behind the prefrontal cortex and controls muscle movements for speech.

On the topic of pain, migraines, and seizures: He has a horn in his head, it probably hurts. Obstructions (like cysts) can cause buildup of cerebrospinal fluid, which can cause pain and is a common cause of seizures. It is difficult to say how many people have benign brain tumors, but there is speculation that benign tumors in the brain are unexpectedly common. People only typically get brain scans when they've already noticed a problem, but there have been cases of perfectly healthy people having (non-cancerous) brain tumors, so a mass being present in the brain does NOT guarantee seizures will occur. This being said, that horn is significantly larger than a typical benign brain tumor. Migraines and seizures are very reasonable to assume.

I don't know what to say about illness and disease. In theory, if the horn grew at any point after birth, I would say he should have died from any pathogens that were introduced during its corkscrewing into his skull. Phineas Gage was bedridden for months due to infection, was under the care of a doctor, and he wasn't living in a sewer. Do the Lands Between understand the germ theory of disease? It may at least know that poop in the brain is bad, but I listen to Sawbones, so I know that isn't something we can just assume. It's possible he's lost some impossible-to-estimate amount of brain matter to infection. Feel free to speculate about Omen resistance to pathogens, but I don't feel that is the point of this essay. I'll say it's safe to assume his body has healed closed around it, but anything else I won't try to extrapolate.

----

Specificity from Horn Trajectory

Possibility 1:

If we estimate the continued trajectory from the visible part of the horn, it actually continues medially, towards the center of the body, and curls downward. This might even miss most of the brain and instead disrupt the frontal, ethmoidal, and maxillary sinus cavities of the skull.

It may possibly even pierce the roof of the mouth, if we roughly estimate the rate at which the horn tapers and where it likely ends. I argue that this is the most optimistic scenario in terms of his health, because although the horn almost certainly penetrates the prefrontal cortex, it may not be as deep as other possibilities.

In this horn trajectory case, he probably experiences constant sinus pressure similar to a permanent head cold, obstruction to his sense of smell, and by extension his sense of taste. Even if the horn does not completely block his nasal cavity, it may have damaged his olfactory nerve and thus disabled his sense of smell anyway. Should the horn obstruct his mouth he may experience physical difficulties eating and speaking.

Possibility 2:

A worse scenario may be to assume this horn instead extends directly backwards. This would likely pass through the motor speech area, and may have caused him to lose the ability to talk, forcing him to relearn how to speak by having another part of the brain learn to do this function (similar to how anyone learns a second language after very early childhood). It may also reach the LEFT temporal lobe, which processes hearing and smell for the RIGHT side of the body, and therefore he could be deaf in his right ear. Again, the olfactory nerve is potentially in the path of the horn, and loss of sense of smell is frequently considered a symptom of brain damage, so regardless of the angle of the horn this is a high possibility.

----

What Time of Horn Growth Could Tell Us

Children are more likely to recover well from brain damage. The older he was when the horn entered his brain, the more likely he would be to experience cognitive impairment.

Should Mohg's horn have developed that way before birth, his brain may have formed around it without issue, or obstructed regions may have simply remained underdeveloped. His skull would also have developed to more 'comfortably' accommodate this horn, rather than having to break and re-heal around a later intrusion. If the horn is shallow enough and its growth occurred during fetal development or very early childhood before the fusing of the bones in the skull, it is possible that left eye blindness and mild discomfort are the only effects. The timing of the horn's growth being before birth or in early infancy is supported by the Regal Omen Bairn, which shows Morgott with seemingly all of his horns, suggesting that omens horns are largely present upon birth and that those horns grow in proportion with them.

However, given the themes associated with the Formless Mother, here is another--vastly more speculative--hypothesis: Mohg's horn was grown deliberately into his skull by the influence of the Formless Mother, perhaps with or without his consent. I find it hard to believe that a force claimed to be the "mother of truth" which "desires a wound" would be unaware of the possible effects of this type of wound.

I posit that the Formless Mother intended to compromise Mohg's consciousness and sense of reason to make him easier to manipulate. If we assume that they were not working together (debatable), the abduction of Miquella and potential interruption and sabotage of his ascension puts an empyrean under the Formless Mother's control, and works counter to the dynasty Mohg desires. Damage to his ability to plan, make rational decisions, and his sense of morality could explain how Mohg seems to want a place for outcast and hated people, likely seeing a kinship with Miquella, but has created something that is the antithesis to the Haligtree.

Furthermore, should we assume that Mohg and Miquella met previously and Miquella had the opportunity to do so, the power Miquella purportedly has to compel adoration in others may have interacted poorly with Mohg's potentially impaired emotional processing, and could have caused an obsessive outcome that the Formless Mother did not predict.

Of course, I don't believe every awful and cruel decision someone makes is the result of brain damage, but this may explain the incongruity between what Mohg seems to want and what he has made. Whether Mohg is "the reigning lord and hierarch of the coming dynasty of Mohgwyn" or "a raving lunatic" may not be an incompatible dichotomy. It may be sequential.

----

Glassbirdfeather you're so wrong, why did you say ___?

I am not a doctor. I am a chemistry student with a biology lean (clinical laboratory science) and am drawing my conclusions from what I've learned in Anatomy, Physiology, and Psychology classes at an introductory level, and I glanced back at my anatomy and psychology textbooks as my sole academic sources. Please don't take this as a well-researched essay, none of the claims I make about mental or physical health are properly cited. This is just fandom theorizing; it's as academically rigorous as fanfiction. Any doctor/member of the medical profession who would like to correct me is invited to do so, I would love to hear more accurate and informed observations.

----

Bibliography

(literally just 2 references, man)

Grison, Sarah and Michael S. Gazzaniga. Psychology in Your Life. Third Edition, W. W. Norton & Company, 2019.

McKinley, Michael P. and Valerie Dean O'Loughlin. Human Anatomy. Fifth Edition, McGraw-Hill, 2017.

[rassicas]

my general Side Order thoughts:

I don't have much of anything groundbreaking to say. I haven't publicly said much in relation to side order in the first place, i don't want to build up crazy expectations, and I've seen much of the fanbase making solid theories anyways. also there has been a lot less information compared to ROTM which is great, I don't want to be able to predict the whole story before the game comes out. I'd rather be surprised like i was with octo expansion! here I just want to put out my thoughts real quick so people know where I stand and that yes i am aware of the Hints and Foreshadowing

Marina's quote at the end of her interview in Splatune 3 is relevant of course, gives us a sense of what this whole world of order is. But did she build it this whole digital simulation, or was it something she found? (mix of both perhaps? found it, contributed to parts of it and it went out of her control?)

Mem cakes, agent 8, cerebral theming...very interested where this all goes. love all the references to OE keep em coming

People have been talking about this already, and the foreshadowing was acknowledged back in haikara walker in 2018. the hat logos on dedf1sh and paul gotta be connected to this thing.

It'd be a huge waste for a more grown-up paul to not show up in s3, either as someone mentioned by Acht or for him to make some sort of musical return post side order.

Glen fiddler has always been interesting to me (in that i anticipated he would become plot relevant somehow) with how he was fully 3d modeled in his sunken scroll. im not 100% on if hes gonna be in side order but the copy machine connections in side order (the fish skeletons in splatoween, also the recent poster?) are sus

^has to be agent 4. of course. seeing enemy inklings instead of enemy octolings sounds awesome btw

I'm expecting the inkopolis square hub to come back as a thing you can access post-game. pearl and marina splatfest concerts

iso padre please come back to me (maybe in said inkopolis square hub world)

who the fuck are you. not a mantis shrimp, looks too soft to be a crustacean to me. closest thing i can compare this to is a black dragonfish nymph but i kind of doubt it. maybe it is some guy who was created to manage things, like CQ to the deepsea metro?

[sch-com]

my executive function model

I've heard the term "executive dysfunction" thrown quite a lot online, but I couldn't really pinpoint what exactly it means. I decided I first need to understand what executive function is first in order to make sense of it.

After some research (not a lot so take it with a big grain of salt) and self-reflection I developed an executive function model to better understand where I struggle and where I excel.

I identified 8 executive functions, split into primary and secondary, and defined how they interact with each other.

I created a diagram that illustrates and summarizes this model, kind of a tldr. The information from the diagram is described in the text in this post though. At the end of the post is an example of how this model applies to me specificaly.

core executive functions

Those I kept the same as in the research I did, as they seem to be more widely agreed upon.

Inhibitory control - suppressing inappropriate behavior, resisting distractions and urges, emotional control

Working memory - holding, recalling, and manipulating information, mental juggling

Cognitive flexibility - switching tasks, shifting attention, tolerating change, letting go of stuck thoughts

secondary executive functions

Those are more adjusted to fit my personal experience, and are in the sequence it which I personaly engage in activities.

Strategic analysis - understanding the problem, reasoning, generating solutions, predicting outcomes; you need to analyze the problem and generate what can be done about it

Decision-making - balancing risk, reward, and long-term outcomes, deciding on course of action; you need to then compare and decide on one of the courses of action from the generated ones

Planning and organization - planning, organizing, breaking tasks into steps, time estimation, prioritizing; once you know what you want to do, you have to plan the actual actionable steps of it, place when you will do them, in what sequence

Action initiation - getting started on tasks, overcoming inertia, avoiding procrastination; you actually need to follow through the plan, go and do the thing you planned

Self-monitoring - monitoring progress, noticing when you're off-task or overwhelmed, error detection, adjusting behavior, self-assessment; once doing the thing, you need to monitor yourself on how you're doing on the task but also notice if something else hasn't become more important

how they interact

The primary executive functions support the secondary, they are like building blocks of them:

1. Inhibitory control

Strategic analysis: prevents rushing to conclusions; allows pause and reflection before jumping to solutions

Decision-making: suppresses impulsive or emotionally-driven choices; supports delay of gratification

Planning and organization: helps avoid distractions when building plans and ignore irrelevant details

Action initiation: inhibits avoidance behaviors or urges to delay ("I’ll do it later")

Self-monitoring: suppresses defensive reactions to noticing errors; allows recalibration

2. Working memory

Strategic analysis: holds problem details, relevant knowledge, and potential solutions in mental space

Decision-making: maintains multiple options, their pros/cons, and predicted outcomes to compare

Planning and organization: tracks task steps, sequences, and dependencies during mental planning.

Action initiation: remembers what the task is and how to begin — even after delays or distractions

Self-monitoring: holds the original goal or plan in mind while checking current performance against it.

3. Cognitive flexibility

Strategic analysis: allows consideration of alternative problem framings or novel solutions

Decision-making: enables reevaluation of options and openness to changing course

Planning and organization: helps adjust plans dynamically if priorities shift or obstacles arise

Action initiation: Supports shifting mental state from rest to task-engaged mode

Self-monitoring: helps switch strategies mid-task, revise expectations, or tolerate outcomes that don’t go as expected

my personal application

Firstly, out of the three core executive functions my weakest one is working memory. I am quite good at the other two though.

Going off that profile of my primary executive functions, I perform as below in the secondary executive functions:

Strategic analysis - I excel at it. My high cognitive flexibility allows me to see a lot of options, and inhibition allows me to focus on analysing a problem for a long time. I compensate for my low working memory by writing things down, visualizing them etc.

Decision-making - I am rather bad at it. After I analyse the problem to its smallest components and generate lots of ideas in the first step, there are a lot of details to keep in mind when comparing them, and this is where my poor working memory struggles. I also have problems with confidence in my decisions, since I can so clearly see so many options possible and their consequences after my analysis.

Planning and organization - another area I am good at, because I can write things down or draw them out thus compensating for my bad working memory. Inhibition allows me to be realistic with my plan, and cognitive flexibility allows me to adapt it to the actual needs.

Action initiation - a real bottleneck in my process. At this stage I usually have so many details I can be easily overwhelmend with my poor working memory. Also it involves deciding to do the thing, and we already know I struggle with decisions. My high inhibition may also cause a lot of hesitation here.

Self-monitoring - I am moderately good at it. I can struggle with keeping the original goal of the task in mind because of poor working memory, but can manage if it's cleary defined and written down. High congnitive flexibility allows me to adjust my actions according to the performance, and inhibition allows me to avoid distractions and reflect without becoming emotional.

As you can see from this picture, I clearly can benefit the most from using various visual aids and allowing myself to "think on paper" rather than forcing myself to hold everything in my brain. I just seem to have small RAM, but my processor is quite strong.