Division of Natural Sciences

Scientists consider an AI-driven approach to generating disaster alerts

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 08 Oct 2026 13:00:00 +0000

Scientists consider an AI-driven approach to generating disaster alerts Rachel Sauer Thu, 10/08/2026 - 07:00

Tiffany Plate

Researchers at �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder’s Institute of Behavioral Science and the Natural Hazards Center are finding new ways to personalize alerts that could help people take more timely action in disaster scenarios

Wildfires. Tornadoes. Hurricanes. Floods. The increased frequency of natural hazards and disasters cropping up all over the world is staggering—as is the potential loss of human life.

To limit casualties amid these disasters, emergency management organizations use a variety of methods to communicate warnings and evacuation alerts. Whether or not people comply with them is another story.

“We know that many individuals don’t really pay attention to disaster alerts until it's too late to take any kind of action,” says Amir Behzadan, professor in the Department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering and fellow in the Institute of Behavioral Science’s Natural Hazards Center. “We're trying to bridge this gap by ensuring that disaster warnings translate into timely action, particularly among communities, individuals and population groups that may have greater barriers to accessing, processing and responding to this type of risk information.”

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder scholars Amir Behzadan (left) and Mary Angelica Painter (right) collaborated on research employing generative AI to explore a new approach to getting people to respond more quickly to disaster alerts.

In a new study, funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Behzadan, Mary Angelica Painter (a research associate at the Natural Hazards Center) and a team of �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder graduate students employed generative AI to explore a new approach to getting people to take action more quickly.

Leveraging Google’s large language model (LLM), Gemini, the team generated and distributed more personalized alerts—which included reminders about pets, dependents and medications—to sample groups to determine how well they would be received and how they might motivate recipients to take action. Their findings were published in September in the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction.

Getting personal

Study participants were first asked a series of questions about their sociodemographic factors (i.e., gender, age, education level, language preference and prior disaster experience). Knowing these factors was key to understanding how people from different walks of life might perceive alerts.

Participants were then asked about personal traits that might impact their needs in a disaster scenario (e.g., whether or not they lived close to family, if they had dependent family members and/or pets, if they used medication and what type of home they lived in). The participants’ ZIP codes were also requested so the messages could be tailored to the types of disasters they would be most likely to experience, given their geographical location.

Their responses were then fed into the LLM, along with examples of the tone the messages should mimic. “The role of AI here was to focus on those personal traits and then try to cater the content and style of the message to the participants that possess those traits,” says Behzadan.

One portion of participants was given the AI-created messages, while another portion was given standard, human-written messages with no personalization.

After reviewing the message, participants were asked to rate it on six different metrics—clarity, trust, relevance, influence, confidence and certainty—that are common parameters known to influence a person’s behavior and decision-making intentions in disaster scenarios.

How AI could level the playing field

The results showed the clearest discrepancy between sociodemographic groups in relation to the standard alerts: women, people with lower education levels and older adults all rated the human-crafted alerts with higher trust and confidence than their counterparts (men, people with higher education levels and younger adults).

Infographic: Amir Behzadan

But that did not hold true among the AI alerts. “Across gender, age and education, what you noticed was that as soon as we introduced AI personalization, those differences tended to diminish,” Behzadan says.

The study also explored how the type of disaster might influence people (e.g., whether a tornado warning might be taken more seriously than a flood warning). “We found that the type of hazard is not that relevant to how people perceive the quality of the alert,” Behzadan says.

While it does seem as though the personalized alerts could engender more trust and inspire more action among all sociodemographic groups, Behzadan’s team does not recommend abandoning the use of conventional messaging formats.

“We're thinking that these two should work together to augment each other,” Behzadan says, adding that future personalized alerts could target specific subgroups within the population that are more likely to trust the customized messages.

Along those lines, Behzadan has already secured additional funding from the Natural Hazards Center and �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder’s Research and Innovation Office (RIO) to pursue work on the potential to use AI to translate disaster alerts into American Sign Language (ASL) for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing individuals.

Given that ASL is a completely different language than English, many people in the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing population would have difficulty reading and understanding disaster alerts transmitted in plain written English (and some may not be able to read it at all), Behzadan says, adding, “And if they can't understand it, they can't act upon it!”

The trust issue

Any broad use of AI is bound to face complications, especially when human lives are at stake.

For this study, the use of AI was not disclosed to participants so the team could gather more realistic reactions to the messaging. “We knew from past research that some people may think that AI-generated content is less legitimate and may have bypassed human agency,” says Behzadan, adding that disclosing the AI use most likely would have skewed people’s perceptions.

But in practice, FEMA and/or state and local disaster agencies would most likely be required to disclose their AI use. So, while personalized alerts could inspire more trust in the short term, the use of AI may inadvertently lead to longer-term distrust of generated alerts, Behzadan says.

Another hurdle in deploying more personalized disaster messaging? The personal information required from recipients.

“There's always a trade-off between privacy and accuracy,” Behzadan says. “If you want a highly accurate AI or technology output that genuinely reflects your specific situation, needs or expectations, you generally have to provide it with some additional context and personal information. Then, the real question is: How much personal information are you willing to give up in exchange for greater accuracy and personalization?”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about natural hazards research? Show your support.

Traditional

White

Researchers are riding shotgun for science

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 05 Oct 2026 13:00:00 +0000

Researchers are riding shotgun for science Rachel Sauer Mon, 10/05/2026 - 07:00

Cody DeBos

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder study shows how a car ride gives scientists new windows into neighborhood health

Many community research interviews last 15 to 30 minutes, taking place either in an interview room or on foot with the researcher and participant walking side-by-side.

As a woman named Mary drove two researchers though her Minneapolis suburb, a few interview questions turned into an hour-long guided tour of her life.

They drove past her current home and two houses where she grew up, the local plant shop where she works, George Floyd Square and a shopping district. There, her voice changed as she recalled the civil unrest and pandemic of 2020 and showed them the shuttered storefronts that remain.

Geography PhD student Mallory Sagehorn (left) and Assistant Professor Jessica Finlay collaborated with University of Minnesota graduate student Grace Savard on research studying how driving interviews might position scientists to learn about people's lives.

That moment is one of dozens captured in a new study co-authored by Mallory Sagehorn, a doctoral student in the �鶹��Ѱ�� Department of Geography, alongside lead author Grace Savard and �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Assistant Professor Jessica Finlay.

Published in SSM – Qualitative Research in Health, their research asks a simple but underexplored question about neighborhood research: How might a driving interview position you to learn about someone's life?

Meeting people how they move

“A lot of what we care about in neighborhood and health research is how people actually interact with the people and places around them—and that’s really hard to get at when someone’s just sitting across from you describing it after the fact,” Sagehorn says.

Conversations conducted while walking with a participant through their neighborhood have given researchers a way to study how people interact with their surroundings. These “go-along” interviews allow for organic interactions that don’t rely on memory alone.

“When you’re moving through the same spaces you’re talking about, participants notice things in real time they might never have thought to mention otherwise,” she adds.

However, in America, walking isn’t how most people move through the world. Whether it’s a car, a bike, a bus or a scooter, reliance on wheeled transportation is the norm for the majority.

Sagehorn and her colleagues wanted to know if conducting go -along interviews—not by walking, but by meeting people how they move—would be more effective.

“It really depends on matching the mode of mobility to how people actually move through a given community,” the researchers say. “If you’re working in a walkable neighborhood, walking interviews make sense. If people primarily get around by car, a ride-along is going to give you more authentic, comfortable data.”

Finlay, who leads a broader research program on how neighborhoods shape health and cognitive aging, says one participant even asked to conduct their interview by skateboard.

“The value of this method is that it flexes to whatever is most comfortable and authentic for our interviewees,” Finlay notes.

A private room on wheels

Of nine participants who chose a car-based interview for the study, their reasons for doing so varied. Many lived in car-dependent suburbs, while others had mobility limitations or didn’t feel safe walking their own streets.

“Part of why we do mobile interviews at all is to observe how people actually interact with their environment, and the bubble changes the nature of that interaction by making it, at times, more indirect,” says researcher Mallory Sagehorn.

The researchers anticipated driving interviews would differ from walking, but they didn’t expect just how much the car itself would reshape the conversation.

“A car-based interview feels like being invited into a private, personal space that moves—almost like stepping into a room of someone’s house,” Savard says.

That intimacy led to what the researchers would dub the “bubble effect.”

“We had folks drive us down streets they said they’d never walk down, simply because being in a car gave them a sense of security and access they wouldn’t otherwise have,” says Savard.

They found that when placing people inside their own vehicle, the bubble it creates allowed them to engage more deeply both on an environmental level and a personal one. It also matters for accessibility. Interviewing in the car lets researchers work around outside factors like mobility limitations, bad weather and physical barriers.

Still, those benefits come at a cost.

Savard says you might not get to experience a participant’s daily routine the same way you might on foot. They may stop for a casual chat with a neighbor when walking but won’t roll down the window when driving with a researcher.

The team acknowledges the limitations of driving interviews, but as science isn’t a zero-sum game, they’re still excited about the methodology.

“There is data you just can’t get from inside a car. But that’s also why we see walking and driving as complements rather than competitors,” Sagehorn says.

Who sits where?

Seating position also mattered a great deal in the team’s study, perhaps to an unexpected degree. Participants were always positioned in the driver’s seat or front passenger seat, while researchers split roles between conversation in the opposite front seat or note-taking in the back.

“It was important that they felt like they were the one guiding us through their community, setting the pace, the speed and the direction we traveled in,” Sagehorn says.

A car-based interview feels like being invited into a private, personal space that moves—almost like stepping into a room of someone’s house.”

The psychology of seat positions during interviews has been explored in other studies, and it’s been shown that being side-by-side can put participants at ease. In the car, it goes a step further. They can focus on the road and their surroundings rather than forcing eye contact, leaving the mind free to engage.

“That can take a lot of the intimidation out of the conversation and make people more comfortable opening up,” Sagehorn says.

Seating arrangements aside, even the clutter of a car can become a storytelling device to an observant researcher.

Whether it’s a scooter in the back seat or flyers for community events tucked into a visor, these artifacts give researchers a glimpse into a participant’s way of life in a way other interview modalities can’t capture.

“People carry pieces of their lives around in their cars, and that becomes a window into their routines, interests and how they move through the world that a walking interview just wouldn’t show us,” says Sagehorn.

Whose voice gets heard

For Sagehorn, Savard and Finlay, the implications of meeting participants at their preferred method of transportation for go-along interviews are important to remember.

The methodology allows people to take part in neighborhood research who otherwise couldn’t if walking was the only option.

“If there is one thing we hope policymakers take away from this work, it’s the importance of centering participants and their lived experiences and that driving mobile methods are really about expanding who gets to participate in research in the first place,” Sagehorn says. “Methodology is not neutral, and the format you choose can determine whose voice actually gets heard.”

That idea continues to shape the team’s outlook.

“Ultimately, we think the biggest takeaway is that if we want policy that actually reflects people’s realities, we need research methods that get us out into those realities,” they say.

As studies on equality and accessibility pave the way for a better life for everyone, go-along interviews on wheels are one more tool researchers can use to gather the most realistic data.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about geography? Show your support.

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder study shows how a car ride gives scientists new windows into neighborhood health.

Traditional

White

Scholar asks: what separates signal from static?

Rachel Sauer — Wed, 30 Sep 2026 13:00:00 +0000

Scholar asks: what separates signal from static? Rachel Sauer Wed, 09/30/2026 - 07:00

Cody DeBos

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder applied mathematician Brian Zaharatos asks, ‘What becomes of thinking when machines think for you?’

When you ask an AI model to solve a math problem, it will. Ask it to draft a legal brief, summarize a medical study or grade a stack of essays, and increasingly, it can do that too.

Whether the resulting output is accurate is less assured.

Even so, artificial intelligence technology is advancing faster than most people can reckon with what it means for them. From its impact in the workplace to decaying trust in information, even the researchers building today’s leading AI models don’t have the answers.

Brian Zaharatos, a teaching professor in the �鶹��Ѱ�� Department of Applied Mathematics, has been searching for one through a philosopher’s lens.

Brian Zaharatos is a teaching professor in the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Department of Applied Mathematics.

His new book, Patterns and Static: Philosophy and the Question Concerning Statistics, isn’t about artificial intelligence inherently, but the ponderings within its pages have much overlap.

“I don’t want to oversell any AI angle. The book is primarily about the inescapably philosophical nature of statistics, and disagreements about the nature of probability and inference,” Zaharatos says.

Yet, Zaharatos raises a question many people are asking themselves right now. What’s left for the human mind once machines can think for us?

‘Computation can be automated. Judgment cannot’

The book’s real focus is a century-old argument over what justifies drawing a conclusion from gathered evidence. Rather than settling the debate, the proliferation of AI into nearly every facet of daily life has raised the stakes.

“Inference is the process of drawing conclusions based on evidence. It’s about moving from data to theories. As the great computer scientist and philosopher Judea Pearl says, ‘How we go from what to why,’” Zaharatos explains.

As an undergraduate, Zaharatos took much inspiration from the work of philosopher Hubert Dreyfus, whose interpretations of Heidegger and his existentialist theories, shaped how he thought about meaning.

“At times, I have been quite convinced by Dreyfus’ main theses about what computers can’t do. His arguments are nuanced, and the fact that AI has come such a long way in the last several years is not by itself strong evidence that he was wrong,” Zaharatos says.

He goes on to explain that he was right about some things, including that AI doesn’t “understand” or “care” in the same way humans do.

“But it seems like he was wrong about others. For example, he famously claimed (during the era of first-gen AI) that AI would never have the ability to drive a car. Enter, Waymo,” Zaharatos says.

What’s more important than deciding what AI can do, however, is deciding when it can be trusted. This, Zaharatos says, is one of the defining questions of our current time.

“Who judges whether we take the proposed solution to be correct with little or no critical thinking on our part, or whether we put it to a rigorous test? Clearly, we do,” Zaharatos says.

The dangers of an agreeable machine

Zaharatos didn’t write a word of Patterns and Static with AI, but he did lean on various AI tools to pressure test his own arguments while drafting it. He came away wary.

“The danger is that we surrender our critical thinking abilities to machines… so I think figuring out how to resist that in some ways and to further hone your skills is difficult but important,” says �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder mathematician Brian Zaharatos.

“I often found it too agreeable. Or I’d find myself questioning what it was saying to me because I know it can be sycophantic. Do you really think my presentation of this argument is strong or are you doing what you’ve been nudged to do—flatter me and keep me engaged?” he asks.

This agreeableness, Zaharatos warns, is a real danger with AI tools. Not so much that AI gets things wrong (which it will), but that it makes believing the output easy, without requiring one to take a moment to step back and examine it.

“Critical thinking is a skill to be cultivated and fine-tuned, similar to physical skills like playing a sport. If we do not practice critical thinking, we will lose it. AI and technology allow us to think less,” he explains.

Zaharatos has seen this playing out both in his own life and in the classroom, where he’s consciously trying to find ways to work against it.

“It’s important to put yourself in situations that seem synthetic or not quite real world that force you to do critical thinking. It actually is very good training for realistic situations when you’re responsible for making a judgment,” he says.

Zaharatos employs a variety of puzzles and scenarios to train his own reasoning skills and those of his students. These problems come with guardrails, forcing one to work through them with nothing but a pencil and paper.

Why bother doing _______, if AI can do it?

Across academic circles, corporate workplaces, and even family living rooms, this question has been asked ad nauseum over the past few years. Zaharatos hears it often.

His answer returns to the idea that a machine can’t do the real thinking for you.

“We’re often so focused on the output. But the output that you get is going to be a function of what you feed into the system. I think you have to know something about your problem and about inference to begin with in order to give AI the proper direction,” he says.

This is part of the reason why he wrote Patterns and Static in the first place. It’s a love letter to inference and to what it really means to decide something based on what you know.

“The fact that there are fundamental disagreements among the top minds in statistics and science about how to properly conduct inference is interesting in its own right,” he says.

Statistics isn’t going to be everyone’s passion, and Zaharatos knows it. But in a world where AI makes it easy to hand off your thinking, his advice has less to do with math than it does with finding whatever it is that makes you want to sit around and ponder.

“If these topics are not inherently interesting to you, my advice is to find something that is. Curiosity is a wonderful state to be in,” he says.

Patterns and Static: Philosophy and the Question Concerning Statistics, and a free sample of the first two chapters, is available now at brianzaharatos.com/book.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about applied mathematics? Show your support.

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder applied mathematician Brian Zaharatos asks, ‘What becomes of thinking when machines think for you?’

Traditional

White

Scholar studies animals through the love in their hearts

Rachel Sauer — Tue, 29 Sep 2026 03:27:04 +0000

Scholar studies animals through the love in their hearts Rachel Sauer Mon, 09/28/2026 - 21:27

Rachel Sauer

In new book for younger readers, �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Professor Emeritus Marc Bekoff advocates for increasing humanity’s ‘compassion footprint’

Zebras, it turns out, are bro huggers.

In Namibia’s Etosha National Park, behavioral ecologist Caitlin O’Connell observed that male zebra leaders “wrap necks, nip and sniff one another around the head and sometimes the genitals. Then they exhibit an exaggerated chewing behavior with their teeth bared and the corners of their lips drawn up as if smiling or laughing with necks extended and ears directed forward. It really looks like they are enjoying a hilarious joke together.”

And then everyone does their business on “a communal dung pile.”

Marc Bekoff is a �鶹��Ѱ�� professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology.

For a long time, conventional wisdom—and even scientific observation—would have asserted that this is merely instinctual mammalian behavior, nothing more than complex evolutionary responses to environmental and inter-group stimuli. They’re animals, after all; surely they aren’t exhibiting joy, playfulness or love?

Not so, says Marc Bekoff, a �鶹��Ѱ�� professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology. In his recently published book for younger readers, Love in their Hearts: A Celebration of Animal Emotions and a Guide to Compassionate Action, written with longtime collaborator Jeff Campbell, Bekoff advocates for increasing humanity’s “compassion footprint.”

“The message is to be nicer to humans, be nicer to non-humans, treat all living things with respect,” Bekoff explains. “We are never too young to hear that message and learn that lesson.”

‘Animals have thoughts and feelings’

Bekoff began learning that lesson, which became the work of his lifetime, when he felt sorry for a goldfish. Growing up in Brooklyn, New York, “everyone had the requisite goldfish in an aquarium on the kitchen counter, including my family, and I used to feel so sorry for that goldfish,” he recalls.

He also spent hours riding his tricycle around the neighborhood, talking to all the animals he saw, and rather than being worried, his parents were supportive. “I used to tell my parents I could feel the emotions of the dogs and cats and mice and birds, I would tell them that animals have thoughts and feelings, and my parents supported it because why not?” he says.

When he was 6, he and his family moved from Brooklyn to Lynbrook on Long Island, which at the time had swaths of woods to explore. Bekoff was a good athlete and a mediocre student, but he nevertheless knew that he had to at least try to get to college if he wanted to continue building a scientific foundation beneath his observations of animals.

Jane Goodall, who would become Bekoff’s dear friend and professional collaborator, “used to say it felt wrong to harm animals and it felt right to try to learn about them, so I went to college and then I got a master’s in neurobiology, then I spent two years in a PhD/MD program disliking every day of it,” Bekoff says.

It was around that time, in the late 1960s, that famed researcher and animal behaviorist Michael Fox joined the faculty at Washington University in St. Louis. Fox, a Royal Veterinary College-trained veterinarian who also held a Doctor of Science in ethology and animal behavior, was doing exactly the sort of work that Bekoff wanted to do: non-invasive, observational science focused on animal behavior.

Fox accepted Bekoff as a graduate student, and he earned a PhD in animal behavior. After a year as an assistant professor of biology at the University of Missouri in St. Louis, he came to �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder in 1974 to study behavioral ecology and carnivore behavior.

“The message is to be nicer to humans, be nicer to non-humans, treat all living things with respect,” says scientist and author Marc Bekoff.

“So, I got my job here, and down on 30th and Marine on East Campus, back when the Institute for Behavioral Genetics was one of the only buildings down there, I somehow got a grant and convinced the university to put in a chain link fence enclosure so we could study coyotes,” Bekoff says. “We had a few coyotes who had been rescued, and they became this beacon. Everybody went down there to see them, so much that we had to put up signs telling people not to play with them.”

From there, he studied Adélie penguins at Cape Crozier, Ross Island, Antarctica, then initiated a field project studying coyotes in Grand Teton National Park.

“I always was driven to know what animals were thinking and feeling, I knew there was a way to study this scientifically and I was really persistent because I knew I was right,” he says. “Back when I was starting out, the major school of thought was behaviorism—the idea that with animal behavior, everything is a stimulus response, and the brain is a black box that we can’t know anything about.

“I said no, there’s just got to be something going on in animals’ minds, particularly concerning what they’re feeling and what they’re calculating. These are wild animals who have difficult lives; I knew there had to be so much more going on.”

Complex emotional lives

A significant facet of Bekoff’s research has been to systematically and non-invasively observe animal behavior to gain insight into the “black box” of animal minds. In addition to the usual challenges of research, he says, was the resistance he initially encountered in the scientific community, many of whose members equated ethology—or the study of animal minds—with finger waggling and magical thinking.

“The science had to be irrefutable,” Bekoff says. “We didn’t have a choice. Michael Fox, my mentor at Washington University, was one of the first ethologists who practiced the science of watching—slow watching, slow looking, just going out and watching animals. We weren’t putting electrodes in their bodies or cutting out parts of their brains; it was uncontrolled.

“A group of us were just really persistent, getting grants and I published tons in refereed journals and published books, just keeping at it and putting it out there, and slowly but surely we had evidence showing that animals have extremely complex emotional lives.”

That growing body of evidence—gathered by Bekoff, Goodall and a community of scientists around the world—is, in part, what inspired Bekoff to write Love in their Hearts, for which Goodall wrote the foreword.

Bekoff gathered animal stories from colleagues around the globe, including O’Connell’s observations of zebra bro hugging, to embody “the universality of emotions.” The aim is not to prove that animals have emotions—“We know they do,” Bekoff says—but to bring those emotions to life for younger readers who may be interested in science, who may spend hours observing animals or who may simply love their pets and have a sense that their pets love them, too.

Love in Their Hearts also gives young readers actionable steps to help care for both animals and Earth—a compassionate conservation approach that children are never too young to learn, Bekoff says, and that he still teaches in Jane Goodall’s Roots and Shoots groups.

“It’s the basic principle of the One Health philosophy,” Bekoff says. “What’s good for animals is good for us, and what’s bad for them is bad for us. Let’s change the world for all its inhabitants.”

“What’s good for animals is good for us," says Marc Bekoff, "and what’s bad for them is bad for us. Let’s change the world for all its inhabitants.” (Photo: Dylan Shaw/Unsplash)

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about ecology and evolutionary biology? Show your support.

In new book for younger readers, �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Professor Emeritus Marc Bekoff advocates for increasing humanity’s ‘compassion footprint.’

Traditional

White

Nobel laureates gather to celebrate Department of Physics

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 28 Sep 2026 22:50:29 +0000

Nobel laureates gather to celebrate Department of Physics Rachel Sauer Mon, 09/28/2026 - 16:50

Nobel laureates Carl Wieland, Eric Cornell, David Wineland and John Hall

Rachel Sauer

At event celebrating the 100th anniversary of the first PhD awarded in the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Department of Physics, researchers reflect on how the department shaped them as scientists

Of the four Nobel laureates seated in a row Saturday afternoon, none set out to win the highest honor in science.

Instead, the goal was doing the science—for the discovery, the limit-pushing, the pursuit of answers to questions as fundamental as “How?” and “Why?”

Nobel laureates Carl Wieland, Eric Cornell, David Wineland and John Hall

At a celebration of the first PhD awarded in the �鶹��Ѱ�� Department of Physics 100 years ago, the department’s four Nobel laureates gathered to share insights into the discoveries that the award recognizes and the role that �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder played in their growth as scientists.

“I think of �鶹��Ѱ��as my physics home,” said Carl Wieman, who shared the 2001 Nobel Prize in Physics with �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder colleague Eric Cornell and Wolfgang Ketterle. “This is where I did almost all my physics research and was very successful, and I'd like to hope that I had some impact on the department. I’ve really enjoyed watching it flourish.”

Wieman, who went on to professorships at the University of British Columbia and Stanford University, came to �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder with ideas about tuning lasers to control and cool atoms to temperatures close to absolute zero—a fifth state of matter that Satyendra Nath Bose and Albert Einstein predicted as Bose-Einstein condensates, but Wieman and Cornell proved.

“When I first showed up here, I had a bunch of ideas that I wanted to implement, and I was a little surprised that Carl was extremely enthusiastic,” Cornell recalled. “He’d say, ‘Let's try that.’ So, that worked super well.

“Anyway, I showed up here, started a lab on my own, and for about 10 years, Carl and I basically ran a joint group. I would wander into his labs and talk to his graduate students and postdocs—and even maybe try and tell them what to do, which they maybe would or wouldn't do—and then I would go back into my own lab. And it was the same with Carl.”

And through that long-term collaboration—which can be rare in science because egos easily get in the way, Wieman said—they saw Bose-Einstein condensation in June 1995.

For John Hall, winner of the 2005 Nobel Prize in Physics with Roy Glauber and Theodor Hänsch, the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Department of Physics has been a science home that balances scientific thinking with imagination—the envisioning of what could be.

“This university is a magnet for great people,” Hall said. “Our students, I can’t imagine having better. They come and they work hard, they have good imaginations,” adding that his students and science colleagues have been significant factors in his lifelong joy in the work.

David Wineland, winner of the 2012 Nobel Prize in Physics with Serge Haroche and now the Knight Research Professor at the University of Oregon, credits his time at �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder with allowing him to explore beyond “junior-level physics” ideas of laser cooling and delve into properties of conservation, momentum and scattering.

“I come back to this idea that this place has been very, very, very good to me,” Cornell said. “It made me as a scientist.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about physics? Show your support.

John Hall (standing) shares insights into his research while (left to right) Carl Wieman, Eric Cornell and David Wineland listen.

Eric Cornell (left) and Carl Wieman (right)

David Wineland (left) and John Hall (right)

At event celebrating the 100th anniversary of the first PhD awarded in the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Department of Physics, researchers reflect on how the department shaped them as scientists.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Carl Wieman discusses his research while Eric Cornell, David Wineland and John Hall listen. (All photos: Glenn Asakawa/�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder)

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder celebrates topping out of new chemistry and applied mathematics facility

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 24 Sep 2026 20:46:06 +0000

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder celebrates topping out of new chemistry and applied mathematics facility Rachel Sauer Thu, 09/24/2026 - 14:46

(Left to right) Irene Blair, dean of the Division of Natural Sciences; Joost de Gouw, chair of the Department of Chemistry; Braulio Baptista, partner at ZGF Architects; Mark Hoefer, chair of the Department of Applied Mathematics; Katherine Eggert, interim dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. (Photo: Patrick Campbell/�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder)

New facility will support research and teaching in fields including analytical spectroscopy, environmental chemistry, computational mathematics and the statistical sciences

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder on Wednesday, Sept. 23, marked a major milestone in the construction of its new Chemistry and Applied Mathematics (CHAP) facility, celebrating the topping out of the building with university leaders, project partners, faculty and staff.

The ceremony recognized completion of the building's structural frame and provided an opportunity to honor the many people helping bring the project from vision to reality.

"The progress we celebrate today reflects the dedication and collaboration of countless individuals who have helped advance this project," said �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Chancellor Justin Schwartz. "The Chemistry and Applied Math facility will be transformational in supporting the next generation of discoveries, learning opportunities and interdisciplinary partnerships at �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder."

Learn more in �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Today

New facility will support research and teaching in fields including analytical spectroscopy, environmental chemistry, computational mathematics and the statistical sciences.

Traditional

White

Student meteorology society named local chapter of the year

Rachel Sauer — Tue, 22 Sep 2026 21:42:42 +0000

Student meteorology society named local chapter of the year Rachel Sauer Tue, 09/22/2026 - 15:42

Members of the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder chapter of the American Meteorological Society on a tour of the NCAR Research Aviation Facility.

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder chapter of the American Meteorological Society recognized for cultivating lasting student networks and leading impactful community outreach

The �鶹��Ѱ�� chapter of the American Meteorological Society (CUBAMS) has been named local student chapter of the year by the national organization.

The honor recognizes the chapter “for cultivating lasting student networks, leading impactful community outreach and establishing a strong, visible presence throughout the American Meteorological Society.” It will be presented at the American Meteorological Society (AMS) annual meeting in Denver this January.

Members of the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder chapter of the American Meteorological Society on a tour of the NCAR Research Aviation Facility.

“This AMS recognition highlights the dedication of our chapter and the broader (atmospheric and oceanic sciences) community to creating an academically supportive, professionally engaged and collaborative environment,” says member Amanda Bowden, a fourth-year PhD candidate in the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (ATOC). “It recognizes the efforts of our members to strengthen the atmospheric sciences community at �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder through professional development, education, outreach and service. It also demonstrates how our students and faculty contribute beyond the university by sharing their knowledge and giving back to the broader public community.”

CUBAMS was formed after ATOC began offering an undergraduate major in fall 2016, explains Andrew Winters, an associate professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and CUBAMS faculty advisor. “A group of students came to me with interest in building one of these chapters as a way to help undergrads who are very much new to the program, to build community,” he says. “In 2021 we really initiated the chapter—students wrote a constitution; they got approved by national organization and got registered as a student organization at CU.”

Anna Hagberg, a senior majoring in applied mathematics and ATOC, says that when she joined CUBAMS, she had just changed her major to ATOC “and was looking for people that I could be friends with (and talk about the weather with). I was also curious about the possible career paths that existed within atmospheric and oceanic science.”

The student-led organization has organized events from tours of the NCAR Research Aviation Facility to eclipse viewing and a weather balloon launch, as well as tabling at AMS conferences.

Wade Julian, a senior ATOC major who also is pursuing an interdisciplinary climate science minor and a certificate in arctic studies, says that participating and serving as an officer in CUBAMS has been one of his most valuable �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder experiences.

“Through the chapter, I have developed a lot of leadership and organizational skills, especially through serving as an officer and helping plan events for our members,” Julian says. “I have also had opportunities to attend professional conferences, meet atmospheric scientists and learn about careers that I would not have been exposed to through my classes alone.

"These experiences have helped me become more confident about pursuing a career in atmospheric science and have given me a better idea of the areas of the field that I am interested in, particularly climate and arctic science.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about atmospheric and oceanic sciences? Show your support.

Members of the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder chapter of the American Meteorological Society at an eclipse viewing event.

Members of the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder chapter of the American Meteorological Society launching a weather balloon.

CUBAMS officers on a Flexible Array of Radars and Mesonets (FARMS) visit.

Students and faculty tabling for the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the annual American Meteorological Society conference.

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder chapter of the American Meteorological Society recognized for cultivating lasting student networks and leading impactful community outreach.

Traditional

White

All photos courtesy Anna Hagberg

Rebecca Machen awarded $2 million National Science Foundation grant

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 21 Sep 2026 16:37:15 +0000

Rebecca Machen awarded $2 million National Science Foundation grant Rachel Sauer Mon, 09/21/2026 - 10:37

Hope Kerrigan

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder mathematician earns competitive grant to fund scholarships and mentoring for academically talented, low-income students pursuing STEM degrees

Rebecca Machen, an assistant teaching professor in the �鶹��Ѱ�� Department of Mathematics, has been awarded a grant from the highly competitive National Science Foundation (NSF) program for Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM).

Machen, principal investigator on the award alongside co-principal investigators Tamara Sumner and Evy McUmber, will receive $2 million between January 2027 to December 2032 for scholarships that aim to support students facing financial barriers to completing STEM degrees.

Rebecca Machen is assistant teaching professor in the �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Department of Mathematics.

Twenty-four students will receive scholarships averaging approximately $12,500 annually for up to five years. This support will also give recipients access to peer mentoring, cohort building, academic coaching, professional development and internships.

The program builds on the investigators’ previous �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder experience. Machen served as director of STEM instruction in the Student Academic Success Center (SASC), which has supported low-income students since the 1970s. McUmber is a chemistry faculty member in SASC and brings extensive experience working directly with its students, while Sumner has led NSF-funded initiatives and helped strengthen and elevate the project as it developed. Together, the team is building on SASC's longstanding academic and community-support model while adding a level of sustained financial assistance and a network of campus partners that had not previously been integrated at this scale.

This project's overarching goal is to increase STEM degree completion among high-achieving undergraduates with financial need, ensuring the number of STEM graduates can keep up with the ever-advancing demand in developing technologies. The project will be formally evaluated by an outside party using matched-comparison analyses of retention, time-to-degree and job or graduate-school placement, contributing to the broader knowledge base on what tangibly helps low-income students succeed in STEM.

"Financial need continues to be a significant barrier to accessing and completing higher education," Machen said. As fields like artificial intelligence, quantum science, robotics and biotechnology continue to grow, she wants talented students from all economic backgrounds to have the chance not just to earn degrees in these areas but to see themselves represented in the careers shaping the future. "This program gives students the financial, academic and professional support they need to pursue those opportunities," she added.

The National Science Foundation's S-STEM program specializes in increasing the number of academically talented, low-income students with demonstrated financial need who earn degrees in STEM fields. The program also aims to improve the education of future STEM workers and generate knowledge about the academic success, retention, transfer, graduation and career pathways of low-income students. This year, NSF is funding numerous S-STEM projects nationwide, including �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder's, as part of its Track 2 cohort.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about mathematics? Show your support.

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder mathematician earns competitive grant to fund scholarships and mentoring for academically talented, low-income students pursuing STEM degrees.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Jeswin Thomas/Unsplash

Scientists get a clearer picture of phytoplankton sustaining ocean food webs

Rachel Sauer — Fri, 18 Sep 2026 19:19:38 +0000

Scientists get a clearer picture of phytoplankton sustaining ocean food webs Rachel Sauer Fri, 09/18/2026 - 13:19

Kaio Kish

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder researchers develop a tool that can model phytoplankton biomass extremes in the ocean in ways that conventional satellites often can’t

Phytoplankton, the tiny, single-celled organisms that live in oceans, are more important than some realize. They are the base of the marine food web and help countless other species in the oceans thrive and survive.

Satellite technology and its continuous advancements have given the world a better understanding of the oceans and the life within them, specifically phytoplankton. But gaps still remain in what satellites can show about the activity of phytoplankton.

Unfortunately, phytoplankton and the oceans they call home are suffering, says Nicole Lovenduski, a �鶹��Ѱ�� professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences (ATOC) and director of the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research (INSTAAR). “You can think of (phytoplankton) as the grasses of the terrestrial biosphere,” she says. “They’re the things that build the foundation that everything else eats.”

In a recently published study conducted in partnership between �鶹��Ѱ��Boulder and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Lovenduski and her research colleagues found that despite what can be seen through satellite imagery, a lot of phytoplankton is obscured—often by clouds or low sunlight.

A mixed phytoplankton community. (Image: Stephanie Anderson/University of Rhode Island/NASA)

The researchers set out to discover what the observational limitations were in detecting phytoplankton biomass extremes in the oceans, building a satellite emulator that mimics the same blind spots a real satellite would encounter: sea ice, clouds, low sun angles. This allowed them to compare what the model predicted to what the satellite actually saw, ultimately revealing the gaps between the two. By combining interdisciplinary expertise, they were able to find the holes in detecting these phytoplankton biomass extremes.

"Statistically, by definition, there have to be extremes in everything—you think about a normal distribution (referencing phytoplankton bloom events), the extremes are on the tail of that bell curve, so mathematically they must exist,” Lovenduski explains. “And I found maybe four papers on this, and that was it. Why isn’t anyone writing about this?... And then I had the a-ha moment: It's because no one can see them in the satellite data."

As Lovenduski explains, extremes are important for the ecosystem: “If there's a huge phytoplankton bloom, that's going to have ramifications for the whole ocean ecosystem in that region. Similarly, if blooms fail to occur, that's going to be devastating for the ecosystem.”

These high extremes refer to a higher-than-normal concentration of phytoplankton in one specific region or area. On the other hand, if a bloom is supposed to happen and it doesn’t—a low extreme—marine life in that region that rely on phytoplankton for their diet can be severely affected, which in turn causes a ripple effect across other species in the ocean.

Combining clouds, ocean and ice

To study these issues, Lovenduski worked with ATOC PhD graduates Genevieve Clow and Samuel Mogen, an INSTAAR postdoctoral scholar, as well as ATOC Professor Jennifer Kay and Michael Levy and Keith Lindsay of the NCAR Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory. The researchers aimed to find a better way to visualize these mysterious single-celled organisms that do so much for our marine ecosystem.

To solve the problem of limited visualization of phytoplankton, the team built what they call a satellite emulator within an Earth system model—a tool that allows them to “see” the modeled ocean the same way a satellite does.

"It is an approach that they've used in atmospheric science before to simulate satellite observations of clouds, and we apply that approach to a completely different thing, which is the pigment chlorophyll in the ocean,” Lovenduski says. “Our ability to detect that from space turns out to be a really important limit on our ability to detect extremes.”

Chlorophyll, a green pigment that phytoplankton and plants use to absorb sunlight, plays a similar role in phytoplankton as it does in plants. It is why large phytoplankton clusters and algae appear green. Chlorophyll helps phytoplankton turn sunlight, water and carbon dioxide into energy while releasing oxygen.

However, because of the limitations caused by cloud coverage blocking satellite imaging of chlorophyll, Kay emphasizes that using field samples as well as satellite imagery is vital to a model: “You can learn so much from the assets that we have in space, and sometimes those assets, while providing an incomplete picture of things, can also provide the space-time perspective that's super important for understanding this change in variability.”

Kay also mentions that a combination of field sampling and the use of satellites are critical to understanding what's going on in the oceans, noting how her group often partners with Boulder-based NCAR scientists to validate Earth system models with data.

As a key part of the research, Clow developed a tool that ran model simulations on a computer. Clow flew a virtual satellite inside the model, sampling the modeled ocean similar to how a real satellite would see the ocean.

Conventional atmospheric satellites wait for reflected light to bounce off the ocean and come back up but, Lovenduski notes, so “if there's a cloud in the way and if the sun angle is really low, there's not enough radiation to come back to the satellite, so we made sure that we included that effect in the model. And if there's sea ice growing on the surface of the ocean, (the satellite) can't see the chlorophyll underneath, but the model still predicts what the chlorophyll is.”

A phytoplankton bloom off the coast of Iceland. (Image: NASA)

By being able to account for these discrepancies in the model, Clow says that the main takeaway from this research is that “our observations of phytoplankton are limited, and that we need to combine observations and models in order to gain a complete picture of what's happening with phytoplankton in the ocean."

One of the most significant findings in this research included the fact that globally, satellites can only detect about 10% of daily low extremes and 19% of daily high extremes. Kay explains that clouds “obscure what you can view in the ocean. It's hard to penetrate into it, and from space you're not going to get that kind of information.”

Clow’s idea for an Earth system model study arose from that issue: “Satellites can only see the surface of the ocean, but in some regions, phytoplankton tend to grow much deeper, and so what satellites can see at the surface isn't representative of what's happening throughout the water column,” Clow explains, adding that this is the main issue with being able to visualize the amount of phytoplankton in a given area.

The stressed oceans

Despite the technical advances represented in the model, the researchers express concerns about the state and health of Earth’s oceans.

“There are so many environmental stressors that are hitting the ocean all at once, so it's getting warmer, and that is in turn is causing the ocean to lose oxygen with time,” Lovenduski says. “That also is making it more difficult for nutrients that are below the surface to get up to the surface and fuel this biological productivity that's so important for the marine food web.

“In addition, the ocean is taking up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which is great for mitigating global warming but actually causing the ocean to become acidic. So, the ecosystems of the ocean are experiencing simultaneous difficult stressors all at once. It doesn't paint a very nice picture."

Phytoplankton observability matters as a sign of what’s happening in our climate, the researchers say. Kay points out that fisheries and other marine-based industries rely on knowledge of extreme events happening in the world. “If we have a heat wave in the atmosphere, we’re kind of miserable,” she says. “So, it can affect life in the ocean as well.”

Kay notes that though Colorado is far from the ocean, residents here still experience similar effects: “I think we can start to expect warmer days and more heat waves and more demand on water resources. I think we all felt that pretty acutely in Colorado this past winter, having 80-degree days in March when we're supposed to have the peak snowpack.”

“Make the model look like reality”

The recently published paper is an important step in continuing research. Clow is beginning a post-doctoral research position at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, where she’ll model the impact of fish on the carbon cycle.

Lovenduski’s group is applying the “make the model look like reality” idea to a fleet of ocean floats that “live forever, they don't ever run out of battery like the real world floats, but they also can do a profile every four hours instead of every 10 days.”

This, she says, will allow the team to, “improve the frequency of sampling, and then we can look at what an ideal float configuration in the real world looks like for the thing that you're interested in sampling.”

Kay is working with a newly launched satellite, called EarthCARE, to better understand the water cycle and how the energy budget and resources will be affected by measuring precipitation near the surface.

The researchers note that the experience of developing a tool to model the detectability of phytoplankton biomass extremes in the ocean, as especially the interdisciplinary approach to this work, is informing their further research.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about atmospheric and oceanic sciences? Show your support.

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder researchers develop a tool that can model phytoplankton biomass extremes in the ocean in ways that conventional satellites often can’t.

Traditional

White

Top image: A green phytoplankton bloom in the Gulf of Finland. (Photo: NASA)

Students sending a text for help

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 17 Sep 2026 22:09:51 +0000

Students sending a text for help Rachel Sauer Thu, 09/17/2026 - 16:09

Tiffany Plate

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Assistant Professor Tamar Kodish is leveraging modern technology to break down barriers to mental health resources at community colleges

Mental health is a significant topic of concern on many college campuses these days. Recent estimates suggest that approximately one in three students at four-year colleges and universities experience mental health issues such as anxiety and depression.

At community colleges, however, that number could be as high as one in two students.

“Community college students tend to face a lot more contextual stressors,” says Tamar Kodish, assistant professor in the �鶹��Ѱ�� Department of Psychology and Neuroscience. “There are much higher rates of food insecurity and houselessness. And they are significantly more likely to come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, or to be racial and ethnic minorities.”

Psychology and neuroscience Assistant Professor Tamar Kodish used a human-centered approach to design a text messaging strategy to encourage students to use free mental health resources. (Photo courtesy Tamar Kodish)

Through prior research, Kodish became interested in exploring different strategies to encourage community college students to access available mental health resources on campus. She began asking, “What can we do to try to improve engagement in mental health services for people who might be at risk of not getting care that they need?”

That question led to a research study, recently published in the journal JMIR Formative Research, examining how the right text messages, sent to students at the right time, could be key to ensuring valuable mental health resources reach the students who may need it most.

Taking a STAND for mental health

Kodish, who received her PhD in clinical psychology from UCLA, received funding for the pilot project through UCLA’s STAND ALACRITY Center, a research center under the UCLA Depression Grand Challenge (DGC). The Center’s aim is to improve the mental health care available to community college students through a new model called STAND. Center researchers are studying how to improve/optimize STAND through a research program at East Los Angeles College.

STAND—which is short for Screening and Treatment for Anxiety and Depression—is an adaptable, scalable system of care that includes screening, treatment and ongoing monitoring of mood and symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Students who choose to engage with STAND first answer different questions about their mental health through an online assessment; based on their responses, they’re triaged into one of three levels of treatment.

Students who have mild symptoms of depression and anxiety are given a self-guided, online wellness program, while those with moderate symptoms receive a digital mental health program, including peer-to-peer coaching support from certified STAND coaches.

Students with severe symptoms are eligible to get clinical therapy—sometimes with psychiatric support—that’s delivered remotely. DGC researchers are testing new approaches to allocating treatment by creating a data-driven algorithm that accounts not only for symptom severity but also for other social and structural factors, like food and housing security.

An example of a text message Kodish’s team developed—alongside community college students—to help identify the barriers and stigmas around receiving mental health care. Students would then receive tailored responses based on their selection. (Illustration courtesy of Tamar Kodish)

Research has shown that the STAND approach works. In a 2023 study, more than 500 UCLA students who engaged with one of the three levels of care showed measurable improvement in depression and anxiety scores.

Encouraging uptake, increasing engagement

Those 500 students, however, were just a portion of the 3,500-plus students who initially took the online screening.

“We found that only 14% of students who were eligible for STAND services actually got started with treatment, so we were losing tons of people along the way,” says Kodish. That led her and her colleagues to explore new ways of keeping people from falling off the continuum of care.

Kodish was also interested in seeing how this engagement might differ at a community college, since the previous study, like many others, was only conducted at a four-year university. "We don't know nearly as much about community college students,” says Kodish. “They're a super underrepresented, and super diverse, group.”

So Kodish headed to East Los Angeles College (ELAC)—where the STAND at ELAC program had been underway since 2022—armed with a new idea for reaching students where they are. “I got really interested in text messaging as a potential approach based on what I had seen in the literature, and from what I knew from talking to college students.”

She began by inviting students on campus to focus groups and asked open-ended questions about what they saw as barriers to engaging with the STAND resources. The goal was to find ways to communicate with students who either dropped off in the middle of taking the STAND screening or completed the screening but didn’t engage with the resources that were delivered to them.

A blueprint for eye-catching texts

“Overall, students were really enthusiastic about using text messaging,” says Kodish. “They felt like it was feasible, it was easy, it was convenient and it would fit into their lives.”

After the focus groups, she asked a subset of those students—19 in all—to help design the messages themselves. “They definitely wanted something that was multimedia,” says Kodish. “They said, ‘They can't be too long, they can't be too spammy, and they need to have imagery and videos to draw you in and differentiate them from other random messages.’”

Kodish’s team took their directives, drafted the look and content of the messages and then returned them to the students for further input before incorporating them into the STAND protocol.

While the current study doesn’t explore how to keep students engaged once they’re in treatment, Kodish says she believes this initial “uptake” phase of the process is still vitally important. “If you don't get people's foot in the door, then sustainment doesn't even matter,” she says.

Personally, Kodish hopes as many students as possible at least take the online screening offered by the program. “They’re getting really valuable information,” says Kodish. “Even if they have mild symptoms or no symptoms, they're getting some information about their mental health status that they might not otherwise have.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about psychology and neuroscience? Show your support.

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder Assistant Professor Tamar Kodish is leveraging modern technology to break down barriers to mental health resources at community colleges.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Eugene Chystiakov/Unsplash

Division of Natural Sciences

Scientists consider an AI-driven approach to generating disaster alerts

Related Articles

Researchers are riding shotgun for science

Related Articles

Scholar asks: what separates signal from static?

Related Articles

Scholar studies animals through the love in their hearts

Related Articles

Nobel laureates gather to celebrate Department of Physics

Related Articles

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder celebrates topping out of new chemistry and applied mathematics facility

Related Articles

Student meteorology society named local chapter of the year

Related Articles

Rebecca Machen awarded $2 million National Science Foundation grant

Related Articles

Scientists get a clearer picture of phytoplankton sustaining ocean food webs

Related Articles

Students sending a text for help

Related Articles

Division of Natural Sciences

Scientists consider an AI-driven approach to generating disaster alerts

Related Articles

Researchers are riding shotgun for science

Related Articles

Scholar asks: what separates signal from static?

Related Articles

Scholar studies animals through the love in their hearts

Related Articles

Nobel laureates gather to celebrate Department of Physics

Related Articles

�鶹��Ѱ�����Boulder celebrates topping out of new chemistry and applied mathematics facility

Related Articles

Student meteorology society named local chapter of the year

Related Articles

Rebecca Machen awarded $2 million National Science Foundation grant

Related Articles

Scientists get a clearer picture of phytoplankton sustaining ocean food webs

Related Articles

Students sending a text for help

Related Articles

�鶹��Ѱ��Boulder celebrates topping out of new chemistry and applied mathematics facility