2 December 2009South African healthcare insurer Discovery has announced its intention to expand into China with the acquisition of a 24.99% stake in Ping An Health Insurance.While China’s private health insurance market is still nascent, there is strong growth potential – in 2007, gross written premiums were approximately 19-billion Yuan (R21-billion), while McKinsey & Company estimates that in 2008, private healthcare premiums reached approximately 55-billion Yuan (R59-billion).The Chinese company is owned by Ping An Insurance, the second largest insurer in China with a market capitalisation of 292-billion Yuan (about R319-billion).“Ping An is an excellent partner,” Discovery CEO Adrian Gore said in a statement this week. “The group is a leader in the Chinese insurance market, providing immediate scale, brand and distribution capability in this rapidly growing market.”Social health insurance limitationsWhile large portions of the Chinese population are covered by the Social Health Insurance (SHI) system, this has strict coverage caps and co-payments, and there is inadequate access to top-tier hospitals and healthcare facilities.According to Discovery, this inadequate cover, coupled with increasing consumer awareness about the need for preventive healthcare, has created demand for private medical insurance.The growing disposable income amongst the 25-40 million middle-class households means many consumers can afford top-up cover, while there is also increasing demand for cover for private healthcare facilities, diagnostics and branded drugs that fall outside the limited SHI schedule of benefits.According to Discovery, the Chinese government recognises the limitations of the SHI, and through their reform process, is encouraging private healthcare insurance providers to play an active role in developing a multi-level health insurance system.Ping An Health currently holds one of a limited number of health insurance licences issued by the Chinese Insurance Regulatory Commission.Middle and upper class customers“Ping An Group currently has a 30% share of the ‘riders’ or ‘supplementary’ private health insurance market,” said Gore. “In 2005, Ping An grasped the enormous growth opportunity and potential of the comprehensive health insurance market, and Ping An Health was established in Shanghai.”Ping An Health’s products and services are primarily aimed at middle and upper income customers, and it has branches in Shanghai, Beijing and Guangzhou. It has recorded significant growth over the last three years with sales increasing more than 400% over the period.“Ping An Health is a fast-growing, well capitalised business,” said Gore. “We are confident that it will be able to maintain its growth trajectory as the Chinese health insurance market develops and it is able to leverage off Ping An group’s comprehensive distribution network and scale in the Chinese market.”The conclusion of the transaction is subject to definitive agreement between the parties, following which it would be subject to the requisite regulatory approvals and other conditions precedent.SAinfo reporterWould you like to use this article in your publication or on your website? See: Using SAinfo material
It’s Monday, and that means it’s time for another edition of FiveThirtyEight’s NBA Power Ratings. The least you need to know about how these numbers work: Each team is ranked according to a projection of its strength over the upcoming week — and the upcoming week only — using Real Plus-Minus (RPM) player ratings provided by Jeremias Engelmann and Steve Ilardi. For more details on the ratings, see our introductory rankings post.(Note: These ratings were calculated before news broke that Chicago’s Jimmy Butler would miss three to six weeks with an elbow injury. Butler carried a strong +3.2 RPM rating, so replacing his 26 minutes per game with a replacement-level player would drop the Bulls from 11th place to a tie for 19th with the Pistons. Chicago’s saving grace might be that the average player below Butler on the team’s depth chart is significantly better than replacement level, but there’s no doubt that this news reduces the Bulls’ rating.)Some observations about the rankings this week:The Oklahoma City Thunder climbed more in the rankings from last week than any other team, leaping from No. 13 to No. 6. The biggest reason? The expectation that Kevin Durant will return in some capacity this week, even if in reduced minutes, was worth 1.7 points per 100 possessions to OKC’s overall rating. The ripple effects of Durant’s return extend beyond his own increased minutes. Our playing-time projections also see Dion Waiters (whose extremely negative RPM falls below the replacement level) getting fewer minutes on the wing — a boon of 0.8 points/100 to the Thunder’s rating. More minutes may also go to plus-minus darling Andre Roberson,1Relative to other metrics at least; from his awful 9.9 Player Efficiency Rating (PER), you wouldn’t expect his RPM to be a strong +2.4. and fewer minutes will go to guard D.J. Augustin, an additional 0.6 point boost for OKC’s rating. The mix of very good and very poor players on the Thunder roster makes the team a great case study in how much effect playing-time reshuffling can have on a team’s overall talent rating.The Atlanta Hawks dropped four spots in this week’s rankings, largely because Al Horford (+2.3 RPM rating), Jeff Teague (+1.3), DeMarre Carroll (+1.2) and Pero Antic (+0.8) are all listed as day-to-day in the team’s injury report. Those slight playing-time downgrades gave more minutes to a host of negative RPM players; chief among them are Dennis Schroder and Kent Bazemore.Joining the Hawks with a four-slot decline this week are the Toronto Raptors. More than half of Toronto’s 1.8 point ratings drop is driven by an injury to Kyle Lowry — and the resulting uptick in playing time for the man behind him on the team’s point guard depth chart, Lou Williams. Williams’s box-score numbers are very good, and Toronto has played much better with him on the court this season. But Real Plus-Minus isn’t convinced despite his great 2014-15 season to date. His long-term predictive RPM is currently -1.9 — with a -3.6 defensive mark — numbers only slightly improved from his -2.0/-3.7 ratings from the end of last season.For all the changes just outside the league’s top tier — in addition to the rise of OKC and declines of Atlanta and Toronto, the Memphis Grizzlies and Houston Rockets both moved up a pair of spots — the top four in our rankings stayed constant. This marks the first time that’s been true since we introduced the rankings in mid-January.With Oklahoma City’s gains, the Western Conference playoff picture is all but set. Seven teams have postseason probabilities in excess of 97 percent, and the Thunder don’t sit too far behind, at 92.7 percent. As for the East, it boasts six teams with playoff odds of 99.6 percent or greater, although there’s some drama to be had with six teams battling for the conference’s final two playoff berths. The Indiana Pacers have the inside track for one of the slots, with a 62.7 percent playoff probability, but none of the five teams behind them are any more than 40.2 percent likely to qualify, which ought to bring at least some tension to the final month and a half of the season.Related to the previous point, it’s worth mentioning that the Utah Jazz have a zero percent probability of making the playoffs despite ranking 12th in talent. What happened? Utah’s record has undershot its Pythagorean expectation by three wins, but the team has also improved its talent rating recently (granted, by too little and too late) by jettisoning Enes Kanter and his -2.5 RPM in a three-team trade with Oklahoma City and the Detroit Pistons.Finally, who on earth is Joffrey Lauvergne? Our projections had the French big man down for 2.8 minutes per game for the Denver Nuggets last week, but he ended up averaging 21 minutes per game instead (and even got a starting nod against the Jazz on Friday). Denver might be toning down Lauvergne’s playing time after he shot 38 percent from the floor and posted a -36 plus-minus in that lone start, but his expected role increase — and -4.4 RPM rating — is still enough to help the Nuggets drop by five slots in the rankings. They’re still not New York Knicks bad, but after their mass talent exodus at the trade deadline, the Nuggets now bring up the rear of the non-Knicks/Philadelphia 76ers division of the power rankings.
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Test pilot Yates is now the first person to ever fly an electric aircraft faster than 200 miles per hour, in his test flight last week at the Inyokern Airport in California’s Mojave Desert. The plane that he flew is called the Long-ESA, (for Electric Speed and Altitude). The aircraft is a modified Long-EZ, serving as a development platform for a new electric aircraft system which will be utilized for a flight across the Atlantic later on. The transatlantic flight is scheduled for 2014. Explore further (Phys.org) — Last week’s record of the fastest ever manned electric aircraft was set by electric-vehicle record-setter Chip Yates. He already had credentials as holding the world record for fastest electric motorcycle going over 196 mph last year. As a test pilot this time around, Yates flew an electric airplane and achieved 202.6 mph in level flight. This topped the previous record of 175 mph last year by the electric aircraft Cri-Cri. The latter, flown by French pilot Hugues Duval, broke the record during the Paris Air Show. The aircraft was powered by a pair of 35-horsepower electric motors and a pair of lithium polymer batteries. World’s first aircraft with serial hybrid electric drive The electric Long-ESA, powered by a 258 horsepower electric motor, is being worked on by electric aerospace company Flight of the Century (FOTC), where Yates is CEO, as an R&D plane for development of the company’s “mid-air recharging technology.” The company team converted Burt Rutan’s Long-EZ airplane (Rutan is an aerospace engineer) for the trial flight. In a two-month workup at the FOTC site, the plane’s gasoline power was converted over to electric power. Just how much can an electric plane achieve? So far, engineers looking at the electric plane’s future in practical terms are concerned the most with range rather than speed, and news of speed records command less attention than longevity of flight. In recognition, Yates hopes his speed runs will help develop the technology needed for longer-endurance flights and more practical electric aircraft. Yesterday’s flight of the electric Long-ESA lasted only 16 minutes. There was a hitch when Yates realized that a battery had been run too low and he had to land sooner than expected. Long-ESA will be given a more capable battery pack as part of subsequent work. The company expects a top speed of 230 to 250 mph with the full-size battery pack in place in September.Yates, meanwhile, is bringing the Long-ESA to the 2012 EAA AirVenture Oshkosh event, which runs July 23 to July 29, where the craft will go on display and where he will present his flight data. FOTC engineers worked on the test program to generate data, video and knowledge in time to share with attendees. After Oshkosh, the company intends to equip the Long-ESA with a custom designed lithium-ion series of battery packs and a front-mounted recharging probe to test mid-air tethering and battery jettison along with “rebalance” technologies. Beyond this test flight, the core mission behind FOTC is to extend the range and endurance of an electric-powered aircraft by replacing battery packs in flight using its mid-air refueling technique of “flying battery packs,” drones full of batteries, for various ground or ocean stations. A UAV would detach from the “mothership” once the batteries are depleted and fly down to a recharging station as a freshly charged battery pack is launched to dock with the aircraft. © 2012 Phys.org Citation: Record-setting electric airplane exceeds 200-mph (w/ Video) (2012, July 23) retrieved 18 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2012-07-record-setting-electric-airplane-mph-video.html More information: www.flightofthecentury.com/
So what does this show explore? Well, the answer is a list of questions. What is devotion? Is it a mere a tool? Or a religious observation or worship? Or an instant mantra to quell one’s innermost disquiet? Or is it all a grand delusion and religious posturing? These are some of the ideas that this show explores through the works on display. Bajaj noted, ‘The art works in the show portray multidimensional elucidations of devotion and the way it transmutes individual entities. There are works that conjure up peace and spiritualism while others that invoke disquiet and action.’ Also Read – ‘Playing Jojo was emotionally exhausting’The show opens today with the performances by Sweta Bhattad and leading puppeteer of India Dadi Pudumjee.This exhibition brings in an interesting exercise to examine the modern intellectual’s notion about devotion. The show has been in the making for the past one year and eminent group of artists contributed to make it so beautiful and absorbing.Curator Puri explains, ‘Great literature, art and cinema have always flourished in times of turmoil and strife. If censorship has imposed laws to stop the common man from protesting, art has provided the perfect platform for him/her to express angst through art.’ Also Read – Leslie doing new comedy special with NetflixThe art works by this fairly large and varied collection of artistes, depicts devotion the most basic and profound human emotion since the inception of the civilization, in multidimensional forms and renditions reflective of each individual entity and his/her leanings or preoccupations.The concept for this annual show on this open platform is reflective of the gallery’s own ethos and support to a diverse representation of art where the only limitation is the ideas that the artiste is able to dream up and the degree of their dedication and commitment to realise it.When: On till 15 January 2015 Where: Gallery Art Positive, Lado Sarai Timing: 10.30am – 7.30pm
Open Quantum Assembly Language (OpenQASM, pronounced open kazm) is a custom programming language designed specifically to minimally describe quantum circuits. In this tutorial, we will learn how to translate OpenQASM programs into quantum scores with IBM QX. We will also look at representing quantum scores in OpenQASM 2.0 programs. You will need a modern web browser and the ability to sign into IBM QX This tutorial is an excerpt taken from the book ‘Mastering Quantum Computing with IBM QX’ written by Dr. Christine Corbett Moran. The book explores quantum computing by implementing quantum programs on IBM QX, helping you be at the forefront of the next revolution in computation. The Quantum Composer is a tool to specify quantum programs graphically, and many SDKs and APIs exist to write compute code to represent a quantum program in a modern language ( Python being a common choice). Like the Quantum Composer, OpenQASM a higher-level language for specifying quantum programs than computer code, but unlike the Quantum Composer, it is neither graphical nor user interface specific, so it can be much easier to specify longer programs that can be directly copied into the many quantum simulators or into IBM QX for use. The Quantum Composer can take as input, programs in OpenQASM, and translate them into the graphical view. Likewise, for every program specified in the Quantum Composer it is easy to access the equivalent in OpenQASM within the IBM QX user interface. OpenQASM is similar in syntax to C: Comments are one per line and begin with // White space isn’t important Case is important Every line in the program must end in a semicolon ; Additionally, the following points apply: Every program must begin with OPENQASM 2.0; (IBM QX at the time of writing uses version 2.0, but this can be updated to whichever version of OpenQASM you are using). When working with IBM QX, the include “qelib1.inc”; header must be given. Any other file can be included with the same syntax; what OpenQASM does is simply copies the content of the file at the location of include. The path to the file is a relative path from the current program. Reading and writing OpenQASM 2.0 programs for the IBM QX will involve the following operations: Include header include “qelib1.inc”; Declaring a quantum register (qregname is any name you choose for the quantum register) qreg qregname[k]; Referencing a quantum register qregname[i]; Declaring a classical register (cregname is any name you choose for the quantum register) creg cregname[k]; Referencing a classical register cregname[i]; One-qubit gate list, available with inclusion of qelib1.inc on IBM QX h, t, tdg, s, sdg, x, y, z, id One-qubit gate action syntax gate q[i]; Two-qubit CNOT gate list, available with inclusion of qelib1.inc on IBM QX cx Two-qubit CNOT gate action (control and target both qubits in a previously declared quantum register) cnot control, target; Measurement operations available measure, bloch Measurement operation action syntax measure q[i] -> c[j]; bloch q[i] -> c[j]; Barrier operation (args are a comma-separated list of qubits) barrier args; Primitive gates (OpenQASM standard but not used on IBM QX) CX, U We will now learn reading OpenQASM programs and translating them into quantum scores as well as translating quantum scores to OpenQASM programs. Note that i and j are integer counters, starting at 0, which specifies which qubit/bit in the quantum or classical register the program would like to reference; k is an integer counter greater than 0 which specifies the size of a classical or quantum register at declaration. Translating OpenQASM programs into quantum scores In this tutorial, we will translate OpenQASM programs into quantum scores by hand to practice, reading OpenQASM code. OpenQASM to negate one qubit Consider the following program: OPENQASM 2.0;include “qelib1.inc”;qreg q;x q; The following lines are the standard headers for working with IBM QX: OPENQASM 2.0;include “qelib1.inc”; Then the following line declares a quantum register of size one named q: qreg q; Quantum registers are automatically initialized to contain |”0″>. Finally, the next line operates the X gate on the first (and only) qubit in the q quantum register: x q; Putting this all together, we can create the following equivalent quantum score: OpenQASM to apply gates to two qubits, and measure the first qubit Next, consider the OpenQASM program: OPENQASM 2.0;include “qelib1.inc”;qreg q;creg c;x q;y q;z q;s q;measure q -> c; The first two preceding lines are the standard header to declare a program and OpenQASM program and the standard import header to interface with the IBM QX. The next two lines declare a quantum register of two qubits initialized to |”00″> and a classical register of one bit initialized to 0: qreg q;creg c; The next three lines apply gates, in order, to the first qubit in the q quantum register: x q;y q;z q; The next line applies a gate to the second qubit in the q quantum register: s q; And the final line measures the first qubit in the q quantum register and places the result in the first (and only) bit in the c classical register: measure q -> c; Putting this all together, we can create the following equivalent quantum score: Representing quantum scores in OpenQASM 2.0 programs Here is an example of writing an OpenQASM 2.0 program from a quantum score. I have broken it down into columns from top to bottom of the score for clarity and annotated these in the diagram by indicating column numbers in orange. Here’s the circuit illustrating the reversibility of quantum computations: Let’s dissect the OpenQASM that generates this circuit. The first lines are, as usual, the headers, indicating the code is OpenQASM and that we will be using the standard IBM QX header: OPENQASM 2.0;include “qelib1.inc”; The next lines declare a quantum register named q of 5 qubits initialized to |”00000″> and a classical register name c of 5 bits initialized to 00000: // declare the quantum and classical registers we will useqreg q;creg c; The next lines will go column by column in the circuit diagram, creating the code for each column in order. We will start with the first column: The first column we can see only contains a CNOT gate, with its control qubit being the third qubit in the q quantum register, q and the target qubit being the second qubit in the q quantum register, q. Looking up the OpenQASM syntax for the CNOT gate in the table in the previous section, we see that it is cnot control, target; which means that the first column will be coded as: //column 1cx q,q; Next, we will move to the second column, which has a number of gates specified. The code for the second column is: //column2x q;h q;s q;y q; Each successive column should now be straightforward to encode from looking at the quantum score in OpenQASM. The full program is as follows: OPENQASM 2.0;include “qelib1.inc”;// declare the quantum and classical registers we will useqreg q;creg c;//column 1cx q,q;//column2x q;h q;s q;y q;//column 3t q;z q;//column 4tdg q;z q;//column 5x q;h q;sdg q;y q;// column 6cx q,q;// column 7measure q -> c;// column 8measure q -> c;// column 9measure q -> c;// column 10measure q -> c;// column 11measure q -> c; The previous code exactly reproduced the quantum score as depicted, but we could make several quantum scores, which are equivalent (and thus several variations on the OpenQASM program that are equivalent), as we saw in previous sections. Here are a couple of things to keep in mind: Each column could be in any order, for example, column 3 could be: t q;z q; Or it could be: z q;tdg q; In addition, any gate operating on a qubit in any column where there is no gate in the previous column on the qubit can be moved to the previous column, without affecting the computation. In this article, we learned how to translate OpenQASM programs in IBX QX into quantum scores. We also looked at Representing quantum scores in OpenQASM 2.0 programs. If you want to learn other concepts and principles of Quantum Computing with IBM QX, be sure to check out the book ‘Mastering Quantum Computing with IBM QX’. Read Next Quantum computing, edge analytics, and meta-learning: key trends in data science and big data in 2019 Did quantum computing just take a quantum leap? A two-qubit chip by UK researchers makes quantum entanglement possible Quantum Computing is poised to take a quantum leap with industries and governments on its side