Academic Encyclopedia - Scientific Entries, Videos & Images

Encyclopedia Insights

More >>

Ongoing

Encyclopedia’s Academic Video Service Is Officially Launched

Encyclopedia MDPI is thrilled to announce significant enhancements to its Academic Video Service, which aim to improve its quality, accessibility, and functionality. Since its launch, our video service has enabled numerous scholars to present their research in a dynamic and visually engaging format, greatly enhancing its visibility and impact. Due to the overwhelmingly positive reception this service has received, we have reached a point where the number of orders we are receiving exceeds our current capacity. In order to maintain the quality of these videos and continue optimizing the service, we have made the decision to introduce a fee. However, to ensure that this service is still a cost-effective option, we have set our prices significantly below the market average. Highlights of the Upgrades to the Service Although the service will now be fee-based, we are committed to providing even more professional and comprehensive support, including the following: One-on-one video production guidance Personalized assistance to ensure your needs are fully met. Scriptwriting and English editing Expertly crafted narratives and professional English editing to ensure your research is presented clearly, accurately, and with impact. High-quality animations Visually engaging animations are created to simplify complex research and captivate your audience. Whiteboard Animations: Clean and minimalist, using hand-drawn illustrations to explain ideas step-by-step. Motion Graphics (MG) Animations: Cartoon Style: Bright, colorful, and approachable, ideal for making technical or scientific content more accessible and engaging. Hand-Drawn Style: Unique and artistic, adding a personal touch to your research while maintaining clarity and professionalism. Customized infographics (optional) We can also create tailored infographics to visually summarize key data or findings, enhancing the clarity and appeal of your video. Native voiceover Native speakers provide voiceovers to enhance the accessibility and reach of your research. Multiple rounds of revision To ensure your video accurately represents your work. Social media promotion Expanding your research's visibility and impact. Why Choose Us? The Proven Impact of Video Abstracts Research shows that a well-crafted video abstract can significantly enhance the visibility and impact of your work. It has been shown to do the following: Increase paper views by 120% （Source: 10.1007/ s11192-019-03108-w） Boost citations by 20% （Source: Wiley Online Library） Improve journal rankings by 33% （Source: Research Square） Raise Altmetrics scores by 140% （Source: Research Square） Our Expertise in Academic Research Backed by MDPI, our experienced production team combines deep academic knowledge with creative excellence. We understand the nuances of scholarly communication and ensure that every frame accurately conveys the value of your research, meeting the highest standards of quality and precision. Collaborations with SCI Journals We have partnered with many SCI journals to create exclusive video series, enhancing the dissemination and impact of published research. For example, our collaborations with Entropy, Remote Sensing, Nanomaterials , Animals , Nutrients, Foods , Sustainability, Encyclopedia, Cancers, etc., have helped authors achieve greater visibility and recognition for their work. Global visibility The videos are linked to your paper's DOI for maximum exposure. Available Video Services and Their Pricing Video Abstract (up to 5 minutes long): Summarizes the key findings, methodology, and significance of your research paper. Regular price: CHF 600 Discounted Price: CHF 400 Short Take (up to 2 minutes long): Uses original animations to explain the specific aspects of your research. Regular price: CHF 500 Discounted Price: CHF 300 Scholar Interview: A face-to-face discussion offering deeper insights into your publication. Regular price: CHF 400 Discounted Price: CHF 200 Video Production Service If you want to see some examples of our videos, please visit https://encyclopedia.pub/video. If you would like to apply for the video service, please click https://encyclopedia.pub/video_service. Others If you have any other questions, please contact office@encyclopedia.pub.

Announcement 07 Apr 2025

When Behavior Speaks: Tracking Dairy Cow Behavior on Farms

Cows communicate a great deal through their behavior. Subtle changes in standing, lying, feeding, or social interactions often provide early indicators of health status, stress levels, or reproductive activity. In modern dairy systems, where herd sizes continue to increase, continuous manual observation is neither efficient nor reliable. Consequently, automated behavior monitoring has become a key component of precision livestock farming. Vision-based behavior recognition offers a non-invasive and scalable solution; however, its practical implementation remains challenging. Variability in posture, lighting conditions, background complexity, and animal density can significantly affect detection performance. A recent study published in MDPI Animals entitled "CAMLLA-YOLOv8n: Cow Behavior Recognition Based on Improved YOLOv8n" addresses these challenges by proposing an improved YOLOv8-based framework for recognizing Holstein cow behaviors in real farm environments. By refining feature representation, attention mechanisms, and localization strategies, the study aims to enhance robustness under practical on-farm conditions. 1. Visual Challenges in On-Farm Cow Behavior Recognition Recognizing cow behavior from visual data in real farm environments is inherently complex. Multiple cows frequently appear within the same field of view, leading to overlap and occlusion that obscure key anatomical features. In addition, behaviors are associated with distinct postural patterns, yet substantial variability exists within each behavior category due to individual differences and environmental influences. Detection is further complicated by changes in apparent cow size caused by varying camera distances, as well as fluctuations in lighting and background elements throughout the day. In many cases, behavior-related visual cues are small, subtle, or only partially visible, particularly during brief interactions or transitional movements. Together, these factors limit the effectiveness of standard object detection architectures when applied directly to farm imagery. 2. Model Design and Methodological Improvements To address these challenges, the study introduces a series of targeted architectural and methodological refinements to the YOLOv8n model. Rather than increasing model complexity, the proposed approach focuses on enhancing feature discrimination, strengthening multi-scale representation, and improving bounding box regression. This design strategy maintains computational efficiency while improving suitability for real-world deployment. 3. Data Augmentation Strategy A hybrid data augmentation strategy was applied to increase the diversity of training samples. Variations in posture, scale, orientation, and environmental conditions were introduced to better reflect the visual complexity of real farm scenes. This approach improves generalization and reduces sensitivity to changes in camera placement, barn layout, and herd composition. 4. C2f-CA Module with Coordinate Attention Within the backbone network, a Coordinate Attention mechanism was integrated into the C2f module, forming the C2f-CA structure. This mechanism encodes spatial position information alongside channel-wise dependencies, allowing the model to retain location awareness while emphasizing behavior-relevant features. As a result, the model more effectively distinguishes individual cows in crowded scenes and suppresses background interference. This is particularly beneficial in multi-cow environments where visual overlap is common. 5. MLLAttention in the Neck for Multi-Scale Feature Fusion To address scale variation among detected targets, the MLLAttention mechanism was introduced into the P3, P4, and P5 layers of the Neck component. These layers integrate features across multiple spatial resolutions. By improving attention-driven feature fusion, the model maintains consistent recognition performance for cows appearing at different distances from the camera, which is a common scenario in open or semi-open farm settings. 6. SPPF-GPE Module for Small Target Enhancement The standard SPPF module was further refined into the SPPF-GPE module by combining global average pooling and global maximum pooling. This modification enhances the extraction of both global context and localized salient features. Improved sensitivity to small or partially occluded targets supports more reliable detection of subtle behavioral cues, which are often critical for early behavioral assessment. 7. Shape-IoU Loss for Improved Localization Accuracy For bounding box regression, the study replaces CIoU loss with Shape-IoU loss, placing greater emphasis on matching the shape and scale of predicted and ground-truth bounding boxes. This adjustment improves localization accuracy in crowded scenes and reduces errors caused by overlapping targets, thereby supporting more reliable behavior recognition. 8. Experimental Validation The proposed CAMLLA-YOLOv8n model was evaluated using a self-constructed dataset comprising 23,073 annotated instances of Holstein cow behaviors. Experimental results show that the improved model achieves higher Precision than earlier YOLO-based approaches. These findings demonstrate that the combined use of attention mechanisms, improved feature fusion, and optimized loss design can enhance detection performance under realistic farm conditions without substantially increasing computational cost. 9. Implications for Precision Livestock Farming The study highlights the practical value of advanced vision-based behavior recognition systems in dairy farming. Improved detection accuracy enables earlier identification of health-related behavioral changes, more reliable monitoring of estrus and reproductive activity, and reduced reliance on manual observation. Such systems support data-driven herd management, contribute to improved animal welfare, and promote more efficient and sustainable farming practices. 10. Conclusion Accurate recognition of cow behavior is essential for modern precision livestock farming. By introducing targeted structural improvements to the YOLOv8n framework, this study provides an effective and application-oriented solution for behavior detection in complex agricultural environments. As visual monitoring technologies continue to evolve, approaches that balance methodological rigor, robustness, and practical deployability will play an increasingly important role in the digital transformation of animal husbandry. For more information about topic, you can view the online video entitled "CAMLLA-YOLOv8n: Cow Behavior Recognition Based on Improved YOLOv8n".

Blog 06 Jan 2026

Increasing the Odds that a Journal Will Accept Your Paper

As an Editor-in-Chief of two earth science journals over the past three decades, several thousand submissions have crossed my desk. I am still surprised and dismayed that so many authors set themselves up for rejection from editors simply because they fail to follow what I will call “publishing rules”. Leading journals typically reject the majority of submissions they receive (the best journals reject as many as 90+% of their submissions); thus, the competition for journal space is severe and authors cannot afford to ignore basic rules. 1. Purpose As a service to aspiring authors, especially those with limited publishing experience, I respectfully submit this set of “dos” and “don’ts” to increase the odds they will receive a favorable decision. My list reflects an editor’s perspective and these recommendations are based on my experience over the past five years as Editor-in-Chief of a journal that receives about 4500 submissions per year, as well as a record of having published over 400 peer-reviewed journal papers. With my ‘editorial hat on’, I can generally reach a decision on a submission’s acceptability following an initial brief appraisal based on a handful of criteria (see below). About 70–85% of them will not survive external review, which thus accounts for my journal’s high desk-rejection rate. I preface my guidelines by pointing out that a good Editor-in-Chief serves two “clients”. Their primary client is the journal’s publisher, but an important secondary client is the authors themselves. While ensuring that a journal publishes high-quality science, editors also provide advice to aspiring authors. 2. Criteria An Editor Uses to Evaluate Manuscripts So, what criteria do I use to make the ‘do-or-die’ decision to either desk-reject a paper or to send it out for external review? Here are the criteria, based on a series of questions, that I and many of my colleagues use to make this fundamental decision: 2.1. Does the Science Appear to be Sound? First and foremost, I ask myself: Does the science appear to be sound? Of course, there is not an editor on Earth who can evaluate the full range of science published in a journal; thus, I have to be cautious. When in doubt, I defer to a pool of Associate Editors or other colleagues. However, I do this only when I find that the following questions are satisfactorily addressed. 2.2. Is the Submitted Paper within the Scope of the Journal? Second, I ask myself: Is the submitted paper within the scope of my journal? Are there more appropriate journals than my journal for the paper? I continue to be amazed at how many papers are submitted to a journal that is not the best choice; many of these submissions are not even in my journal’s remit. If I find that authors have missed their targeted audience, I reject their submission, although I generally recommend more appropriate journals in my decision letter. Of course, such decisions might involve judgment calls, as many papers are at the perimeter of a specific journal’s scope. However, top-tier journals typically have limited capacity, even in the electronic world in which we now live, and thus are forced to triage submissions according to topic. With an average of 13 incoming submissions per day in the case of my journal, I have to make some hard decisions about their suitability. With these comments in mind, authors should very carefully review the on-line scopes of journals that they are considering for submission in order to ensure that they choose the most appropriate one. 2.3. Does the Paper Advance Science? The next question I ask myself is: Does the paper advance science? Or put differently, does it have some novelty? If the answer is yes, the paper will likely interest my journal’s readers and will thus be seen to be relevant and more likely to be cited by peers. If the answer to either of these questions is no, authors should choose a lower-tier journal that does not penalize what might be labelled a “case study” of limited interest to readers. Bear in mind that journals “live and die” on citation metrics, for example, CiteScores. Of course, scholars favor submitting their best work to journals with high citation metrics, but they also have to be realistic about the quality and potential impact of their work. To deal with this issue, authors should always explain their submission’s contribution to science in the Introduction and Discussion sections of their paper. It is in those sections they can answer the question: “Why should you, the reader, care about my paper?” 2.4. Is the Paper Well-Prepared? The fourth set of questions I ask of myself include the following: Is the writing clear? Has the manuscript been critiqued by all co-authors? And has it also been reviewed by colleagues who can provide advice on the structure and clarity of the writing? This is not solely an issue for non-native English speakers; it applies to all authors, including native English speakers. Related to this, there is no excuse for failing to perform a spell check prior to submission. I am stunned by the number of submissions to my journal that are poorly structured and grammatically flawed. It may be a bias on my part, but a carelessly prepared paper is also likely to be scientifically flawed. Here are many suggestions for authors to follow to prevent an editor from “hitting the reject button” on the basis of flawed writing: Rigorously follow the journal’s submission guidelines to ensure that the paper is properly formatted. If you are an inexperienced author, structure your manuscript using traditional section headings (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Conclusion, References). Prior to submission, have your paper carefully reviewed by your co-authors and by trusted colleagues who have not been involved in the study. Review the draft paper several times yourself, allowing yourself adequate time (days or weeks) between reviews. Use spell check and AI to polish the English, but remember that using AI to write a paper is a breach of scientific ethics. 2.5. Is the Introduction Appropriate for a Scientific Paper? My fifth question: Is the Introduction appropriate for a scientific paper? The Introduction is not an appropriate place for a literature review. Literature reviews are suitable in theses and reports, but typically not in scientific papers. The appropriate literature can be cited in the Introduction to provide context for the topic of the paper and is clearly required in a Discussion before the Conclusions. An Introduction provides the reader with an understanding of the core questions or the problem that the paper is addressing and how the paper advances science. 2.6. Is There a Discussion Section After the Results? My sixth set of evaluation questions: Is there a Discussion section after the Results? Are the results and the discussion separated? The lack of a stand-alone Discussion section indicates to me that the paper is likely a case study with limited generality and a small pool of interested readers. The mixing of results and discussion is a scientific ‘no-no’. The results and discussion should be clearly separated because the former presumably can be replicated by other scientists, whereas the latter is more subjective and typically presents the authors’ view of the broader implications of their work. I still am amazed that authors fail to understand this difference by including sections titled ‘Results and Discussion’. 2.7. Are The References Cited in the Paper Appropriate? A final question that I ask when evaluating a manuscript relates to the references cited in the paper: Is the pertinent literature, including papers and sources published in the past several years, cited? If not, I will wonder if the authors are up to date on the topic of their paper. I also search for evidence of over-citation of the authors’ own work. 3. Final Tips Here are some final tips for prospective authors: Include line numbers on journal submissions and double-space the manuscripts. Minimize the use of acronyms and avoid them completely in article titles. Ensure that the font size of all words in figures is large enough to be legible to a reader. Scale the font size of the print to the size of the figure. Respect stated journal length limits. If in doubt, ask the editor whether a manuscript that is longer than the journal’s maximum length is acceptable for your submission. Do not include the study area in a heading under the title ‘Methods and Study Area”. The two are very different. Biography John Clague is Emeritus Professor at Simon Fraser University. He was a Research Scientist with the Geological Survey of Canada from 1975 until 1998, prior to accepting an appointment as Canada Research Chair at Simon Fraser University, a position he held until 2016. Clague is a leading authority in environmental earth sciences, natural hazards, and climate change. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and an Officer of the Order of Canada. He has served as Editor-in-Chief of the journal Natural Hazards since 2021, and before that he was Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences.

Blog 29 Dec 2025

How Can Sanitation Sustainability Be Measured? Insights from Hashemi's Sanitation Sustainability Index

In many regions worldwide, sanitation systems play a decisive yet often overlooked role in public health, environmental protection, and social well-being. Selecting an appropriate sanitation solution is therefore not only a technical challenge but also a social and economic one. A study published in MDPI Sustainability, entitled "Sanitation Sustainability Index: A Pilot Approach to Develop a Community-Based Indicator for Evaluating Sustainability of Sanitation Systems" introduces a community-based framework for evaluating sanitation options prior to implementation. By integrating technical, economic, and social dimensions into a single composite indicator, the Hashemi’s Sanitation Sustainability Index (HSSI) offers a structured and context-sensitive approach to supporting informed sanitation planning in alignment with Sustainable Development Goal 6. 1. The Rationale for a Sustainability-Based Assessment Framework Sanitation interventions frequently encounter challenges not solely due to technical limitations but because economic feasibility and social acceptance are insufficiently considered during the planning stage. Systems that perform well from an engineering perspective may impose unsustainable financial burdens or conflict with local cultural practices. Conversely, low-cost solutions may fail to adequately protect public health or the environment. The HSSI was developed to address these limitations by providing a pre-implementation evaluation framework that integrates technical, economic, and social dimensions of sustainability. By enabling direct comparison among alternative sanitation technologies, the index supports informed decision-making and reduces the risk of system failure following deployment. 2. Structure of Hashemi's Sanitation Sustainability Index The HSSI comprises three sub-indices—technical, economic, and social—each consisting of normalized, dimensionless variables. This normalization ensures that the index is adaptable to local conditions and applicable across diverse geographic and socio-economic contexts. Technical Sustainability The technical sub-index evaluates the efficiency with which sanitation systems utilize resources and manage waste streams. It includes three primary indicators: Water Efficiency, which assesses water consumption per sanitation event relative to community standards; Energy Efficiency, which evaluates the energy requirements for wastewater treatment processes; Waste Recycling Efficiency, which measures the proportion of waste that is safely recovered and reused. These indicators are calculated using straightforward comparative equations that benchmark proposed systems against existing local practices, thereby facilitating transparent and meaningful comparisons among different sanitation technologies. 3. Economic Sustainability Economic viability is a critical determinant of the long-term success of sanitation systems, particularly in low-income and resource-constrained settings. The economic sub-index includes: Capital Cost Index, reflecting initial investment requirements; Maintenance Cost Index, capturing long-term operational and maintenance expenses; Direct Economic Benefits, accounting for potential revenue generation, such as the recovery of nutrients or energy. Sanitation systems that demonstrate cost-effectiveness or generate tangible economic benefits receive higher scores, highlighting options that are more likely to be financially sustainable over time. 4. Social Sustainability The social sub-index addresses human and behavioral dimensions that strongly influence sanitation system performance. It incorporates two key variables: Acceptability, which evaluates alignment with cultural norms, user preferences, and community perceptions; Public Health Impact, which assesses the system’s effectiveness in improving hygiene and reducing disease transmission. Although these indicators are qualitative in nature, they are quantified through structured surveys, pilot studies, and standardized scoring methods, ensuring consistency and comparability across assessments. 5. Application and Validation: A Case Study from South Korea The applicability of the HSSI was demonstrated through a comparative assessment of two sanitation systems implemented in a suburban area of Seoul, South Korea: a conventional septic tank system and a resource-oriented sanitation (ROS) system. The findings indicate that the ROS system achieved a substantially higher overall HSSI score (0.71) than the septic tank system (0.42). This outcome was primarily attributable to the ROS system’s superior performance in waste recycling and its potential to generate economic benefits, despite exhibiting lower levels of social acceptability. To assess the robustness of the index, the authors employed Monte Carlo simulations to estimate the statistical distribution of HSSI scores. The results confirmed that the calculated values fell within a 95 percent confidence interval, supporting the reliability and stability of the index. 6. Implications for Policy and Practice A key strength of the HSSI lies in its adaptability. The index can be applied across a wide range of spatial and institutional scales, including rural communities, urban informal settlements, and regional or national sanitation planning initiatives, provided that context-specific data are available. By emphasizing simplicity, flexibility, and pre-implementation assessment, the HSSI serves as a practical decision-support tool for policymakers, engineers, and development organizations seeking to identify sanitation systems that are not only technically sound but also economically viable and socially acceptable. 7. Concluding Remarks Hashemi’s Sanitation Sustainability Index provides a structured and integrative framework for evaluating sanitation systems through a sustainability lens. By systematically incorporating technical, economic, and social dimensions, the index facilitates transparent and evidence-based decision-making. As global efforts continue toward achieving universal access to safe and sustainable sanitation under SDG 6, tools such as the HSSI are expected to play an increasingly important role in guiding investments and ensuring that sanitation solutions are resilient, context-appropriate, and sustainable in the long term. For more information about topic, you can view the online video entitled "Hashemi's Sanitation Sustainability Index (HSSI)".

Blog 23 Dec 2025

Encyclopedia Journal Accepted for Coverage in Scopus

We are pleased to announce that in August 2025, Encyclopedia (ISSN 2673-8392) has been selected for coverage in the Scopus indexing database. We would like to extend our sincerest gratitude to all the authors, reviewers, and editors who have contributed to this journal and made this achievement possible. Encyclopedia is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal that mainly publishes high-quality entries, field guides, reviews, and systematic reviews in all scientific areas. Original research articles in the area of Encyclopedia Studies are also welcome. Our goal is to form a comprehensive record of scientific development and provide reference information not only for researchers but also for the general public interested in accurate and advanced knowledge on specific topics. To make the most of this opportunity, we would like to invite you to submit your research to the journal. We warmly welcome you to consider Encyclopedia as a platform for publishing your work. If you have a paper concerning any topic within the scope of the journal, please submit it via the journal’s website: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/encyclopedia.

Announcement 28 Aug 2025

See what people are saying about us

Shlomi Agmon

Encyclopedia Video provides potential readers with a tool to quickly understand what the work is about. That is important for casualreaders, whose time is thus spared, and for investedreaders, for whom it makes the decision to say "yes, I want to read the paper" much simpler.

School of Computer Science and Engineering, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 9190401, Israel

Ignacio Cea

For the video abstracts, the papers and authors could gain more visibility and increase citations. Also, it means a more diverse and interesting way of communicating research, which is something valuable in itself.

Center for Research, Innovation and Creation, and Faculty of Religious Sciences and Philosophy, Temuco Catholic University

Melvin R. Pete Hayden

Thank the video production crew for making such a wonderful video. The narrations have been significantly added to the video! Congratulations on such an outstanding job of Encyclopedia Video team.

University of Missouri School of Medicine, United States

Encyclopedia:
From Scholars for Scholars

Trending Entries

Top Viewed Entries

Encyclopedia: From Scholars for Scholars

Trending Entries

Top Viewed Entries

Encyclopedia:
From Scholars for Scholars