Search

This paper argues that existing quantitative studies mistakenly assume that all nuclear states can impose nuclear destruction on opponents by simply distinguishing nuclear states from non-nuclear states. This practice, however, does not capture variation in 1) nuclear states' possession of delivery capabilities, 2) the range of deployed nuclear delivery systems, and 3) the geographic distance between nuclear states and their dyadic counterparts. Instead of this monadic nuclear statehood approach, I propose the dyadic nuclear reach approach, which uses a new dyad-specific measure of states' strategic nuclear delivery capabilities. It codes whether a nuclear state can launch a nuclear strike against a given opponent by using the information about the estimated range of each nuclear state's strategic nuclear delivery platforms, nuclear operation bases, and states' capital cities. An empirical application shows that using an appropriate measure of nuclear capabilities does significantly alter existing empirical knowledge of nuclear weapons and international conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper revisits the latest statistical evidence for the nuclear emboldenment thesis—nuclear-armed states are more likely to initiate military aggression than non-nuclear states—from (Bell and Miller 2015). If correct, their findings have important theoretical and policy implications regarding the effect of nuclear proliferation on international conflict. This paper shows, however, that Bell and Miller's findings heavily rely on two important components of their statistical analysis: (1) using all state dyad observations, and (2) employing pooled regression models to analyze time-series-cross-sectional (TSCS) data. I argue that those components are based on questionable assumptions on heterogeneity in their dataset. Based on alternative strategies dealing with heterogeneity in dyadic data, my reanalysis shows that the emboldening effect of nuclear weapons is not as robust as originally claimed. Instead, I find the robust deterrent effect of nuclear weapons: nuclear-armed states are less likely to be targeted in military disputes. These findings highlight the need for careful application of quantitative methods to produce a more robust understanding of nuclear issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The nuclear competition school, an emerging theoretical perspective on the political effect of nuclear weapons, argues that a favorable nuclear balance can significantly reduce one's expected costs of nuclear war and therefore affect the interaction between nuclear-armed states, such as deterrence and crisis outcomes. This new perspective also presents a wide array of empirical evidence demonstrating the significant effect of the nuclear balance of power on political outcomes, thereby challenging the theory of the nuclear revolution, which argues that the nuclear balance of power produces no meaningful effects on political outcomes because no state can escape costly nuclear destruction. Little attention, however, has been paid to systematically exploring the effect of the nuclear balance on the initiation of nuclear crises. This is surprising, given that observable factors, such as the nuclear balance, should have a powerful effect at the crisis initiation stage because countries can observe military balance and assess the costs and benefits of entering a crisis. This article tests a core argument of the nuclear competition school regarding the effect of the nuclear balance on the initiation of nuclear crises. With original data on strategic nuclear balance, my statistical analysis shows that having a superior nuclear arsenal than another nuclear-armed opponent does not lead to a reduced likelihood of nuclear crisis initiated by the opponent. These core findings hold after conducting a series of robustness tests with various measures of the balance of nuclear forces. They encourage us to reconsider the persuasiveness of the nuclear competition school and offer implications for US nuclear policy and force size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We report the synthesis and characterization of hierarchical porous carbons (HPCs) prepared by direct carbonization of zinc‐based metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), and their electrochemical performance as an electrode material for supercapacitors. All the HPCs showed high porosity (Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) surface areas 1000–1820 m2/g) with micro‐, meso‐, and macropores. The HPC‐based electrodes exhibited a high‐specific capacitance in the range of 164–203 F/g (scan rate: 10 mV/s), which suggests that these porous carbons may be useful for fabricating supercapacitors. Among the HPCs, HPC‐4 with the largest surface area as well as with ~1% nitrogen content exhibited the highest specific capacitance, which is comparable with those of other reported carbon materials. This work suggests that the hierarchical porosity and nitrogen doping in HPCs may enhance their conductivity and specific capacitance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Proton-conducting materials are an important component of fuel cells. Development of new types of proton-conducting materials is one of the most important issues in fuel-cell technology. Herein, we present newly developed proton-conducting materials, modularly built porous solids, including coordination polymers (CPs) or metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). The designable and tunable nature of the porous materials allows for fast development in this research field. Design and synthesis of the new types of proton-conducting materials and their unique proton-conduction properties are discussed., (Copyright © 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)

Membrane proteomics, the large-scale global analysis of membrane proteins, is often constrained by the efficiency of separating and extracting membrane proteins. Recent approaches involve conjugating membrane proteins with the small molecule biotin and using the receptor streptavidin to extract the labelled proteins. Despite the many advantages of this method, several shortcomings remain, including potential contamination by endogenously biotinylated molecules and interference by streptavidin during analytical stages. Here, we report a supramolecular fishing method for membrane proteins using the synthetic receptor-ligand pair cucurbit[7]uril-1-trimethylammoniomethylferrocene (CB[7]-AFc). CB[7]-conjugated beads selectively capture AFc-labelled proteins from heterogeneous protein mixtures, and AFc-labelling of cells results in the efficient capture of membrane proteins by these beads. The captured proteins can be recovered easily at room temperature by treatment with a strong competitor such as 1,1'-bis(trimethylammoniomethyl)ferrocene. This synthetic but biocompatible host-guest system may be a useful alternative to streptavidin-biotin for membrane proteomics as well as other biological and biotechnological applications.