统一思想奋发拼搏全面贯彻落实州党委工作会议精神

全面贯彻落实州党委工作会议精神足当前和今后一一个时期重要的政治任务。李湘林书记的工作报告，从全国、全疆发展大局和伊犁实际出发，全面回顾总结了2010年及“十一五”以来的工作和成就．深刻分析了面临的重大机遇和重大挑战，进一步明确了伊犁跨越式发展的主攻方向，科学规划了州直“十二五”经济社会发展的美好蓝图，对2011年和今后五年经济社会发展提出了新的要求。     

Visualization of latent fingerprints using fluorescence lifetime imaging on paper emitting strong fluorescence

Latent fingerprints were successfully visualized using fluorescence lifetime imaging (FLIM) on paper which emits strong fluorescence with a lifetime close to that of fingerprints and thus from which it is difficult for time-resolved spectroscopy to visualize fingerprints. Latent fingerprint samples on paper were excited using a 450 nm or 532 nm nanosecond pulsed-laser, and time-resolved fluorescence images were obtained at a delay time of 6–16 ns in intervals of 1 ns, to the excitation pulse. The excitation beam was expanded using a lens, and the fluorescence from the fingerprints was captured using an intensified CCD camera. Because of the large fluorescence intensity of the background paper of approximately two to four orders of magnitude larger than that of the fingerprint, the fingerprint was not visualized on each fluorescence image by time-resolved spectroscopy. However, the fingerprint was visualized in a FLIM image constructed using a series of the fluorescence images for the case with the fluorescence intensity of the background paper being four orders of magnitude larger than that of the fingerprint. The difference in fluorescence lifetime in the FLIM image of the visualized fingerprint and background paper was in the order of 0.1 ns, which was an order of magnitude smaller than the inherent fluorescence lifetime of a few nanoseconds for the fingerprints and paper. It was demonstrated that, at a background fluorescence intensity with a certain order of magnitude larger than that of fingerprints, FLIM has the potential to visualize latent fingerprints which cannot be visualized by time-resolved spectroscopy.     

Public funds for private enterprise: The international finance corporation 1

In a recent article Helleiner [1974: 351] argues that the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) scheme has operated in such a way as to transfer real resources from developed countries (DCs) to less developed countries (LDCs). Helleiner attempts to substantiate this claim empirically by examining the net acquisition of SDRs which has been made by DCs, and the net use of SDRs which has been made by LDCs since the SDR facility was established. In this article it is suggested that, although the SDR agreement has, indeed, served to create an ‘informal’ SDR/aid link, net use data taken at face value do not necessarily reflect the extent or nature of this informal link.