text:
Talk:Viewdata

Quote "Source: from Federal Standard 1037C".

Yet, as far as I can tell, the word viewdata is not on the page which is quoted as a source.

Songwriter 07:16 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * It isn't in the Wikipedia article but it is in the external link. Biscuittin (talk) 22:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the earlybrowsers}} table as this has nothing whatsoever to do with viewdata systems. Also, more history of viewdata is available at the Prestel page. 87.81.12.15 (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Viewdata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060303070521/http://haven.jml.net:80/ to http://haven.jml.net

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Colour check
Inspired by an article by Mr Samuel Fedida in the magazine Wireless World, William J. G. Overington, who had invented Telesoftware, designed an electronic artwork that could be displayed on a Viewdata page.

Mr Overington sent the design to Mr Fedida and Mr Fedida kindly arranged to have it keyed and then displayed on page 786 of the Viewdata system. Mr Overington viewed the design on a Viewdata equipped television set at the National Physical Laboratory (United Kingdom) in September 1977.

The design, upon a black background, was as if a block of red light at upper left, a block of green light at upper right (yet not the exact "upperness" value, it may have been higher or lower, possibly higher) and a block of blue light at lower centre, were all overlapping, so that seven colours appeared in the design. Namely yellow where the red block and the green block overlapped, white where all three blocks overlapped, magenta where the red block and the blue block overlapped, and cyan where the green block and the blue block overlapped.

Yet the three notionally overlapping blocks were not made solid colour, each block was made of some rows and some columns in which each character was the graphics version of a lowercase letter e thus the design consisted of lots of chunks of colour of two different sizes upon the black background.

Although designed to look as if three semi-filled rectangles, red, green, blue are overlapping, the design needed to have each of the areas encoded directly in the appropriate colour.

The design, in the teletext and viewdata format, is using lowercase letters e in graphics mode in seven colours. The design included eight different control codes, each a number of times. These eight control codes were the Hold Graphics control character and seven control codes of the form Graphics Colour, where Colour can be any one of Red, Green, Yellow, Blue, Magenta, Cyan, White.

Yet the way that the design was conveyed to Mr Fedida was not electronic.

Mr Overington had purchased from a stationery shop a notebook with ruled squares printed on each page; a notebook of the type used for exercises when initially learning arithmetic. A page was extracted from the centre, then a rectangle that enclosed twenty-four rows and forty columns was drawn upon it. This was to represent a Viewdata page, notwithstanding that each cell was square rather than rectangular.

A lowercase letter e was written in black where a lowercase letter e was to be keyed, and elsewhere letters were written in red to represent where the control codes were to be used. A legend explaining the meaning of each of the red letters was added below the design. The lowercase letters r, g, y, b, m, c, w were used for the seven Graphics Colour characters, and H was used for the Hold Graphics character. The Hold Graphics character was in one of the first few cells of each line that contained any "Graphics e" characters.

It would be interesting to know if the original paper design survives anywhere, and to know if the electronic version is archived somewhere and could be recovered, as both are part of the exciting times in the 1970s when teletext and viewdata were new technologies.

The 2021 graphic
A graphic, made in 2021 using the Affinity Designer program, is based, as best remembered, on the design of the Colour Check page that was displayed on page 786 of the Post Office's Viewdata system.

https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/154847-colour-check/

Sextile symbol not rendering
Starting a topic to report a problem: That star-like symbol called the "sextile" isn't rendering for me on an Apple MacBook Air (M1, 2020) using both the latest Chrome and Firefox versions at the time of writing. Might need to use a kind of character encoding warning template like exists on linguistics pages. — AzureArmagedd0n (talk) 11:34, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

 * The "script" option recently added to unichar might provide a workaround? See template talk:unichar. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:44, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how one would use that to approximate a sextile. I'm very new to wiki editing so I'm quite unfamiliar with wiki templates and such. AzureArmagedd0n (talk) 05:03, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * More specifically, is there any font routinely available on MacBook that includes the sextile glyph? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I've no clue about that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ AzureArmagedd0n (talk) 05:02, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Short of copying the symbol into a document and then trying every font you have available until you find one? Then, pretending that the answer is Helvetica (most unlikely), try this: If that works with your selection, we can revise the article accordingly. A possible clue to finding the answer is astrology because the symbol  is used there too, so almost certain to feature on MacBooks. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I copied the symbol into the Font Book app and cycled through every system font but found no luck there. Would loading a web font be an appropriate solution? Perhaps maybe placing an svg in lieu of the character would work. AzureArmagedd0n (talk) 10:29, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * How strange. In that case, I'm afraid we just have to put up with it until the folks at Apple sort themselves out. An image of the symbol is already in the article, so I don't see that we really need another instance of it. (A web font would solve it for you but not for the other million MacBook users out there who wouldn't expect to have to install some special font first.) TBH, Viewdata is a very niche interest and very few people indeed will encounter it. But I've left a message at talk:Astrology since it is far more likely to be encountered there (sadly). --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:50, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I am running a now older version of macOS (Monterey) so I can't speak for later versions which might have the symbol included but thanks for the quality follow-up regardless. AzureArmagedd0n (talk) 04:23, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Viewdata


text:
Jorge Arce

Jorge Armando Arce Armenta (born July 27, 1979), best known as Jorge Arce, is a Mexican former professional boxer who competed from 1996 to 2014. He is a multiple-time world champion, and the second boxer from Mexico to win world titles in four weight divisions (after Érik Morales, who first achieved the feat two months prior). In a storied career, Arce held the WBO light flyweight title from 1998 to 1999; the WBC and lineal light flyweight titles from 2002 to 2004; the WBO super flyweight title in 2010; the WBO junior featherweight title in 2011; and the WBO bantamweight title from 2011 to 2012. Additionally he held the WBC interim flyweight title from 2005 to 2006, the WBA interim super flyweight title from 2008 to 2009, and challenged once for the WBC featherweight title in his final fight in 2014.

Arce remains a favorite fighter among boxing fans and is also the older brother of title contender Francisco Arce Armenta. Arce's trademark ring entrance featured him wearing a black cowboy hat (earning him the nickname "The Mexican Cowboy") and sucking a cherry lollipop.

Early years at light flyweight
Arce turned pro at the age of 16, winning his first four fights. He lost to future champion Omar Romero and drew with Gabriel Munoz in back-to-back fights in the summer of 1996, but then won 10 straight bouts and a pair of regional belts before losing on points to veteran (and future IBF Light Flyweight Champion) Jose Victor Burgos on December 12, 1997.

He recovered from that setback with four straight wins, earning his first world title shot on December 5, 1998 against Juan Domingo Córdoba for the WBO Light Flyweight title. Arce won the fight and became a world champion at the age of 19.

After making one successful defense of his title, Arce drew a big-money fight in Tijuana against three-time former champion Michael Carbajal on July 31, 1999. Arce was ahead on all three judges' scorecards after 10 rounds, but in the 11th, the veteran Carbajal connected with a stunning right hand and captured the crown via a technical knockout, as Arce was unable to continue.

After a four-month layoff, Arce returned to the ring and won a WBO regional belt as he scored 7 consecutive wins while working his way back up the rankings for another title shot. That came on October 20, 2001, when he defeated Juanito Rubillar for the Interim WBC version of the Light Flyweight title. Nine months later, he beat Yo-Sam Choi, the reigning Lineal and WBC light flyweight champion who had been out with an injury, to take full distinction. He held the title until the summer of 2005 before relinquishing it to move up in weight. In his first defense, he defeated Augustin Lara. In 2003, he successfully defended his title three times against Ernesto Castro, Lee Marvin Sandoval, and Melchor Cob Castro.

Towards the end of 2003, he participated in the Televisa version of Big Brother, the Big Brother V.I.P. show that put celebrities together. He arrived in third place, then went training for his next defense, against former world champion Joma Gamboa on January 10 of the following year. Arce invited his Big Brother celebrity friends to the fight with Gamboa, his first fight of 2004, which he won by a second-round knockout. But during and after the fight, chaos ensued. One of his friends, actress Arleth Gonzalez, was kicked off her chair by another person. And Verónica Castro was pursued by the press when she was trying to leave the fight site, taking her more than two hours to get to the site's parking lot.

On April 24, 2004, Arce successfully defended his title in a rematch against former champ Melchor Cob Castro in Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas. Arce had beaten Castro in May 2003, but the fight was called off after six rounds due to a clash of heads which injured Arce. The fight went to the scorecards and Arce won a narrow, but controversial, decision. He left no doubt in the rematch, knocking Castro out in the fifth round.

On September 4 of that same year, he retained the title with a twelve-round decision in a rematch with Rubillar. The fight caused some controversy afterwards, when Rubillar's manager accused the fight's judges of robbing his fighter, going on to offer Arce 100,000 US$ for a rematch, which would be held in the Philippines.

Arce moved on to defend his title for a seventh time on December 18, defeating Juan Centeno by a third-round TKO. He then decided to try his luck in the flyweight (112-pound) weight division.

Flyweight
On March 19, 2005, Arce stopped Hussein Hussein in the 10th round of a fight for the right to challenge Pongsaklek Wonjongkam for his WBC Flyweight title. He later relinquished his light flyweight crown and was matched by the WBC with Angel Priolo on July 30 for their interim title after Wonjongkam suffered an injury. Arce scored a third-round TKO win in the fight, held in La Paz, Mexico.

While waiting to fight Wongjongkam, Arce stayed busy by rematching Hussein on October 8 in Las Vegas. He retained his Interim WBC title with a second-round knockout.

On December 16, 2005, Arce defeated former two-time champion Adonis Rivas by 10th round tko. In his next bout, Arce defeated Rivas in a rematch.

On April 8, 2006, Arce took on the well regarded, former WBA Minimumweight and Light Flyweight Champion Rosendo Alvarez of Nicaragua, knocking Alvarez out in the sixth round. It was the 4th successful defense of his Interim Flyweight title.

Super flyweight
On September 23, 2006, he moved up to the super flyweight division where he defeated former Light Flyweight Champion Masibulele "Hawk" Makepula by fourth-round knockout (which, according to the HBO commentators, he had predicted earlier). On January 27, 2007, he defeated Argentinian Julio Ler in a 12-round decision, thus earning the WBC #1 super-flyweight ranking.

On April 14, 2007, he lost a 12-round unanimous decision to WBC Super Flyweight Champion Cristian Mijares in San Antonio, Texas. Mijares won the fight by a wide margin, with the official judges scoring the match 119–109, 118–110, 117–111, all in favor of Mijares.

Arce rebounded from the loss by defeating future champion Tomás Rojas by 6th-round technical knockout. On December 1, 2007, Arce defeated former Flyweight Champion Medgoen Singsurat by technical knockout in the first round.

On May 17, 2008, in a very close fight, Arce (49–4–1, 37 KOs) edged Devid Lookmahanak of Thailand (18–2, 9 KOs) with a majority decision in the main event at the Plaza Monumental Aguascalientes in Aguascalientes, Mexico. With a sold-out crowd of 18,000 fans cheering him on, Arce had to dig deep and work hard to pull past the once-beaten Lookmahanak, who turned out to be a very game southpaw and rarely took a step back. The difference in the fight, which also gave Arce the win, was a knockdown in the seventh round. The scores were 115–113, 115–114 and 114–114. Without the extra point for the knockdown, the fight would have been scored a draw. The bout was an eliminator for a shot at the WBC Super Flyweight title. Arce moves on to a rematch with Cristian Mijares, who earlier captured the WBA's version of the title with a points win over Alexander Muñoz.

On September 15, 2008, Arce won the Interim WBA Super Flyweight title from holder Rafael Concepción.

Arce blasted former champion Isidro García, on November 1, 2008, via (48 seconds of the) 4th round technical knockout for a super flyweight belt. He improved to 51–4–1, with 38 wins inside the distance, while Garcia, who has lost 3 of his last 4 fights, was down to 25–6–2.

On February 7, 2009, Arce was defeated by Undisputed Super Flyweight Champion Vic Darchinyan.

Arce fought Simphiwe Nongqayi on September 15, 2009 for the IBF Super Flyweight title which was recently vacated by Darchinyan. However, he ended losing by unanimous decision.

Arce defeated Indonesian Angky Angkota on January 30, 2010, winning the vacant WBO Super Flyweight title. Prior to the bout, Arce stated that he would retire from boxing if he would have lost.

Bantamweight
On April 24, 2010, Arce jumped to the bantamweight division to fight fellow Mexican Cecilio Santos (24–13–3; 14 KO) at the Centro de Usos Multiples in Ciudad Obregón, Sonora, Mexico. Arce defeated his opponent by KO in the 7th round, improving his record to 54–6–1. This was not his first fight as a bantamweight: he already fought once in the weight class in 2007.

Arce was scheduled to fight Eric Morel (42–2; 21 KO) of Puerto Rico on June 26, 2010 at the Alamodome in San Antonio, Texas, United States with the Interim WBO Bantamweight title at stake. The Los Mochis native withdrew from the fight a few weeks in advance due to a cut he received while in training.

In his next fight, on July 31, 2010, Arce took on fellow Mexican and former champion Martín "El Gallo" Castillo at the Palenque de la Feria in Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico. The Los Mochis native won the bout by KO in the first round.

Super bantamweight
On May 7, 2011, as a heavy underdog, he beat a then undefeated WBO Super Bantamweight Champion, Wilfredo Vazquez, Jr. of Puerto Rico by twelfth-round technical knockout. He avenged his prior loss to former champion Simphiwe Nongqayi in defense of his title.

Bantamweight
Arce moved down to the bantamweight division to face Angky Angkotta in a rematch for the vacant WBO bantamweight title. He defeated Angkotta by unanimous decision.

Return to super bantamweight
On February 18, 2012, he defeated former champion Lorenzo Parra. In his next fight, he faced future featherweight title holder Jesus Rojas. Arce dropped Rojas in the opening round, however, the fight ended in a no-contest in the 2nd round after Rojas delivered a series of fowls rendering Arce unable to continue.

He then moved up to the featherweight division and defeated former champion Mauricio Martínez.

On December 15, 2012, Arce fought WBO Super Bantamweight champion Nonito Donaire. He suffered a defeat on the third round via knockout. After losing to Donaire, Arce announced his retirement.

Featherweight
Arce announced his return to the ring a year later in the featherweight division. After scoring three consecutive wins, he challenged WBC World Featherweight champion Jhonny Gonzalez, however, he was defeated by 11th round TKO. He retired after the bout.

Life outside of boxing
Arce has gained some popularity outside the ring as well, acting in various Televisa comedy sketches, and participating in Adal Ramones's show's dancing contest, "Bailando por un Sueño", where he and a fellow contestant arrived in eighth place out of nine couples. He has also done boxing commentary for TV Azteca.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Jorge Arce


text:
Mammography

Mammography (also called mastography: DICOM modality = MG) is the process of using low-energy X-rays (usually around 30 kVp) to examine the human breast for diagnosis and screening. The goal of mammography is the early detection of breast cancer, typically through detection of characteristic masses or microcalcifications.

As with all X-rays, mammograms use doses of ionizing radiation to create images. These images are then analyzed for abnormal findings. It is usual to employ lower-energy X-rays, typically Mo (K-shell X-ray energies of 17.5 and 19.6 keV) and Rh (20.2 and 22.7 keV) than those used for radiography of bones. Mammography may be 2D or 3D (tomosynthesis), depending on the available equipment or purpose of the examination. Ultrasound, ductography, positron emission mammography (PEM), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are adjuncts to mammography. Ultrasound is typically used for further evaluation of masses found on mammography or palpable masses that may or may not be seen on mammograms. Ductograms are still used in some institutions for evaluation of bloody nipple discharge when the mammogram is non-diagnostic. MRI can be useful for the screening of high-risk patients, for further evaluation of questionable findings or symptoms, as well as for pre-surgical evaluation of patients with known breast cancer, in order to detect additional lesions that might change the surgical approach (for example, from breast-conserving lumpectomy to mastectomy).

In 2023, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force issued a draft recommendation statement that all women should receive a screening mammography every two years from age 40 to 74. The American College of Radiology and American Cancer Society recommend yearly screening mammography starting at age 40. The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (2012) and the European Cancer Observatory (2011) recommend mammography every 2 to 3 years between ages 50 and 69. These task force reports point out that in addition to unnecessary surgery and anxiety, the risks of more frequent mammograms include a small but significant increase in breast cancer induced by radiation. Additionally, mammograms should not be performed with increased frequency in patients undergoing breast surgery, including breast enlargement, mastopexy, and breast reduction.

Digital
Digital mammography is a specialized form of mammography that uses digital receptors and computers instead of X-ray film to help examine breast tissue for breast cancer. The electrical signals can be read on computer screens, permitting more manipulation of images to allow radiologists to view the results more clearly. Digital mammography may be "spot view", for breast biopsy, or "full field" (FFDM) for screening.

Digital mammography is also utilized in stereotactic biopsy. Breast biopsy may also be performed using a different modality, such as ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

While radiologists had hoped for more marked improvement, the effectiveness of digital mammography was found comparable to traditional X-ray methods in 2004, though there may be reduced radiation with the technique and it may lead to fewer retests. Specifically, it performs no better than film for post-menopausal women, who represent more than three-quarters of women with breast cancer. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that there was insufficient evidence to recommend for or against digital mammography.

Digital mammography is a NASA spin-off, utilizing technology developed for the Hubble Space Telescope. As of 2007, about 8% of American screening centers used digital mammography. Around the globe, systems by Fujifilm Corporation are the most widely used. In the United States, GE's digital imaging units typically cost US$300,000 to $500,000, far more than film-based imaging systems. Costs may decline as GE begins to compete with the less expensive Fuji systems.

3D mammography
Three-dimensional mammography, also known as digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), tomosynthesis, and 3D breast imaging, is a mammogram technology that creates a 3D image of the breast using X-rays. When used in addition to usual mammography, it results in more positive tests. Cost effectiveness is unclear as of 2016. Another concern is that it more than doubles the radiation exposure.

Photon counting
Photon-counting mammography was introduced commercially in 2003 and was shown to reduce the X-ray dose to the patient by approximately 40% compared to conventional methods while maintaining image quality at an equal or higher level. The technology was subsequently developed to enable spectral imaging with the possibility to further improve image quality, to distinguish between different tissue types, and to measure breast density.

Galactography
A galactography (or breast ductography) is a now infrequently used type of mammography used to visualize the milk ducts. Prior to the mammography itself, a radiopaque substance is injected into the duct system. This test is indicated when nipple discharge exists.

Medical uses
Mammography can detect cancer early when it’s most treatable and can be treated less invasively (thereby helping to preserve quality of life).

According to National Cancer Institute data, since mammography screening became widespread in the mid-1980s, the U.S. breast cancer death rate, unchanged for the previous 50 years, has dropped well over 30 percent. In European countries like Denmark and Sweden, where mammography screening programs are more organized, the breast cancer death rate has been cut almost in half over the last 20 years.

Mammography screening cuts the risk of dying from breast cancer nearly in half. A recent study published in Cancer showed that more than 70 percent of the women who died from breast cancer in their 40s at major Harvard teaching hospitals were among the 20 percent of women who were not being screened. Some scientific studies have shown that the most lives are saved by screening beginning at age 40.

A recent study in the British Medical Journal shows that early detection of breast cancer – as with mammography – significantly improves breast cancer survival.

The benefits of mammography screening at decreasing breast cancer mortality in randomized trials are not found in observational studies performed long after implementation of breast cancer screening programs (for instance, Bleyer et al. )

When to start screening
In 2014, the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of the National Institutes of Health reported the occurrence rates of breast cancer based on 1000 women in different age groups. In the 40–44 age group, the incidence was 1.5 and in the 45–49 age group, the incidence was 2.3. In the older age groups, the incidence was 2.7 in the 50–54 age group and 3.2 in the 55–59 age group.

While screening between ages 40 and 50 is somewhat controversial, the preponderance of the evidence indicates that there is a benefit in terms of early detection. Currently, the American Cancer Society, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the American College of Radiology, and the Society of Breast Imaging encourage annual mammograms beginning at age 40.

The National Cancer Institute encourages mammograms every one to two years for women ages 40 to 49. In 2023, United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) revised the recommendation that women and transgender men undergo biennial mammograms starting at the age of 40, rather than the previously suggested age of 50. This adjustment is prompted by the increasing incidence of breast cancer in the 40 to 49 age group over the past decade.

In contrast, the American College of Physicians, a large internal medicine group, has recently encouraged individualized screening plans as opposed to wholesale biannual screening of women aged 40 to 49. The American Cancer Society recommendations for women at average risk for breast cancer is a yearly mammogram from age 45 to 54 with an optional yearly mammogram from age 40 to 44.

Screening for high-risk population
Women who are at high risk for early-onset breast cancer have separate recommendations for screening. These include those who:

 * Have a known BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation.
 * Have a 1st-degree relative (parent, brother, sister, or child), 2nd-degree relative (aunts, uncles, nieces, or grandparents), or 3rd-degree relative with a known BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation.
 * Have a lifetime risk of breast cancer >20% according to risk assessment tools
 * History of radiation therapy to chest between 10 and 30 years of age
 * Have or has a 1st-degree relative with a genetic syndrome including Li-Fraumeni syndrome, Cowden syndrome, or Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome

The American College of Radiology recommends these individuals to get annual mammography starting at the age of 30. Those with a history of chest radiation therapy before age 30 should start annually at age 25 of 8 years after their latest therapy (whichever is latest). The American Cancer Society also recommends women at high risk should get a mammogram and breast MRI every year beginning at age 30 or an age recommended by their healthcare provider.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) advocates screening for women who possess a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation or have a first-degree relative with such a mutation, even in the absence of the patient being tested for BRCA1/2 mutations. For women at high risk, NCCN recommends undergoing an annual mammogram and breast MRI between the ages of 25 and 40, considering the specific gene mutation type or the youngest age of breast cancer occurrence in the family. Additionally, NCCN suggests that high-risk women undergo clinical breast exams every 6 to 12 months starting at age 25. These individuals should also engage in discussions with healthcare providers to assess the advantages and disadvantages of 3D mammography and acquire knowledge on detecting changes in their breasts.

Radiation
The radiation exposure associated with mammography is a potential risk of screening, which appears to be greater in younger women. In scans where women receive 0.25–20 Gray (Gy) of radiation, they have more of an elevated risk of developing breast cancer. A study of radiation risk from mammography concluded that for women 40 years of age and older, the risk of radiation-induced breast cancer was minuscule, particularly compared with the potential benefit of mammographic screening, with a benefit-to-risk ratio of 48.5 lives saved for each life lost due to radiation exposure. This also correlates to a decrease in breast cancer mortality rates by 24%.

Pain
The mammography procedure can be painful. Reported pain rates range from 6–76%, with 23–95% experiencing pain or discomfort. Experiencing pain is a significant predictor in women not re-attending screening. There are few proven interventions to reduce pain in mammography, but evidence suggests that giving women information about the mammography procedure prior to it taking place may reduce the pain and discomfort experienced. Furthermore, research has found that standardised compression levels can help to reduce patients' pain while still allowing for optimal diagnostic images to be produced.

Procedure
During the procedure, the breast is compressed using a dedicated mammography unit. Parallel-plate compression evens out the thickness of breast tissue to increase image quality by reducing the thickness of tissue that X-rays must penetrate, decreasing the amount of scattered radiation (scatter degrades image quality), reducing the required radiation dose, and holding the breast still (preventing motion blur). In screening mammography, both head-to-foot (craniocaudal, CC) view and angled side-view (mediolateral oblique, MLO) images of the breast are taken. Diagnostic mammography may include these and other views, including geometrically magnified and spot-compressed views of the particular area of concern. Deodorant, talcum powder or lotion may show up on the X-ray as calcium spots, so women are discouraged from applying them on the day of their exam. There are two types of mammogram studies: screening mammograms and diagnostic mammograms. Screening mammograms, consisting of four standard X-ray images, are performed yearly on patients who present with no symptoms. Diagnostic mammograms are reserved for patients with breast symptoms (such as palpable lumps, breast pain, skin changes, nipple changes, or nipple discharge), as follow-up for probably benign findings (coded BI-RADS 3), or for further evaluation of abnormal findings seen on their screening mammograms. Diagnostic mammograms may also performed on patients with personal or family histories of breast cancer. Patients with breast implants and other stable benign surgical histories generally do not require diagnostic mammograms.

Until some years ago, mammography was typically performed with screen-film cassettes. Today, mammography is undergoing transition to digital detectors, known as digital mammography or Full Field Digital Mammography (FFDM). The first FFDM system was approved by the FDA in the U.S. in 2000. This progress is occurring some years later than in general radiology. This is due to several factors:
 * 1) The higher spatial resolution demands of mammography
 * 2) Significantly increased expense of the equipment
 * 3) Concern by the FDA that digital mammography equipment demonstrate that it is at least as good as screen-film mammography at detecting breast cancers without increasing dose or the number of women recalled for further evaluation.

As of March 1, 2010, 62% of facilities in the United States and its territories have at least one FFDM unit. (The FDA includes computed radiography units in this figure. )

Tomosynthesis, otherwise known as 3D mammography, was first introduced in clinical trials in 2008 and has been Medicare-approved in the United States since 2015. As of 2023, 3D mammography has become widely available in the US and has been shown to have improved sensitivity and specificity over 2D mammography.

Mammograms are either looked at by one (single reading) or two (double reading) trained professionals: these film readers are generally radiologists, but may also be radiographers, radiotherapists, or breast clinicians (non-radiologist physicians specializing in breast disease). Double reading, which is standard practice in the UK, but less common in the US, significantly improves the sensitivity and specificity of the procedure. Clinical decision support systems may be used with digital mammography (or digitized images from analogue mammography ), but studies suggest these approaches do not significantly improve performance or provide only a small improvement.

Scoring
Mammogram results are often expressed in terms of the BI-RADS Assessment Category, often called a "BI-RADS score". This was developed by the American College of Radiology in 1993 in order to provide referring clinicians and patients a clear, meaningful and standardized report. The findings of a mammogram are divided into five main categories: mass, asymmetry, architectural distortion, calcifications, and associated features. Each has additional subcategories to further describe findings. After providing a description of the findings, the radiologist provides a final assessment ranging from 0 to 6.

 * BI-RADS 0 indicates an incomplete assessment which needs additional imaging.
 * BI-RADS 1 & 2 indicate a negative and benign screen mammogram respectively.
 * BI-RADS 3 indicates probably benign.
 * BI-RADS 4 indicates suspicious for malginancy.
 * BI-RADS 5 indicates highly suggestive of malignancy.
 * BI-RADS 6 is for biopsy-proven breast cancer.

A BI-RADS 3, 4, 5, and 6 would require further investigation with a diagnostic mammogram.

In the UK mammograms are scored on a scale from 1–5 (1 = normal, 2 = benign, 3 = indeterminate, 4 = suspicious of malignancy, 5 = malignant). Evidence suggests that accounting for genetic risk, factors improve breast cancer risk prediction.

"Work-up" process
In the past several years, the "work-up" process has become highly formalized. It generally consists of screening mammography, diagnostic mammography, and biopsy when necessary, often performed via stereotactic core biopsy or ultrasound-guided core biopsy. After a screening mammogram, some women may have areas of concern which cannot be resolved with only the information available from the screening mammogram. They would then be called back for a "diagnostic mammogram". This phrase essentially means a problem-solving mammogram. During this session, the radiologist will be monitoring each of the additional films as they are taken by a radiographer. Depending on the nature of the finding, ultrasound may often be used as well.

Generally, the cause of the unusual appearance is found to be benign. If the cause cannot be determined to be benign with sufficient certainty, a biopsy may be recommended. The biopsy procedure will be used to obtain actual tissue from the site for the pathologist to examine microscopically to determine the precise cause of the abnormality. In the past, biopsies were most frequently done in surgery, under local or general anesthesia. The majority are now done with needles in conjunction with either ultrasound or mammographic guidance to be sure that the area of concern is the area that is biopsied. These core biopsies require only local anesthesia, similar to what would be given during a minor dental procedure.

History
As a medical procedure that induces ionizing radiation, the origin of mammography can be traced to the discovery of X-rays by Wilhelm Röntgen in 1895.

In 1913, German surgeon Albert Salomon performed a mammography study on 3,000 mastectomies, comparing X-rays of the breasts to the actual removed tissue, observing specifically microcalcifications. By doing so, he was able to establish the difference as seen on an X-ray image between cancerous and non-cancerous tumors in the breast. Salomon's mammographs provided substantial information about the spread of tumors and their borders.

In 1930, American physician and radiologist Stafford L. Warren published "A Roentgenologic Study of the Breast", a study where he produced stereoscopic X-rays images to track changes in breast tissue as a result of pregnancy and mastitis. In 119 women who subsequently underwent surgery, he correctly found breast cancer in 54 out of 58 cases.

As early as 1937, Jacob Gershon-Cohen developed a form a mammography for a diagnostic of breast cancer at earlier stages to improve survival rates. In 1949, Raul Leborgne sparked renewed enthusiasm for mammography by emphasizing the importance of technical proficiency in patient positioning and the adoption of specific radiological parameters. He played a pioneering role in elevating imaging quality while placing particular emphasis on distinguishing between benign and malignant calcifications. In the early 1950s, Uruguayan radiologist Raul Leborgne developed the breast compression technique to produce better quality images, and described the differences between benign and malign microcalcifications.

In 1956, Gershon-Cohen conducted clinical trails on over 1,000 asymptomatic women at the Albert Einstein Medical Center on his screening technique, and the same year, Robert Egan at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center combined a technique of low kVp with high mA and single emulsion films developed by Kodak to devise a method of screening mammography. He published these results in 1959 in a paper, subsequently vulgarized in a 1964 book called Mammography. The "Egan technique", as it became known, enabled physicians to detect calcification in breast tissue; of the 245 breast cancers that were confirmed by biopsy among 1,000 patients, Egan and his colleagues at M.D. Anderson were able to identify 238 cases by using his method, 19 of which were in patients whose physical examinations had revealed no breast pathology.

Use of mammography as a screening technique spread clinically after a 1966 study demonstrating the impact of mammograms on mortality and treatment led by Philip Strax. This study, based in New York, was the first large-scale randomized controlled trial of mammography screening.

In 1985, László Tabár and colleagues documented findings from mammographic screening involving 134,867 women aged 40 to 79. Using a single mediolateral oblique image, they reported a 31% reduction in mortality. Dr. Tabár has since written many publications promoting mammography in the areas of epidemiology, screening, early diagnosis, and clinical-radiological-pathological correlation.

Arguments against screening mammography
The use of mammography as a screening tool for the detection of early breast cancer in otherwise healthy women without symptoms is seen by some as controversial.

Keen and Keen indicated that repeated mammography starting at age fifty saves about 1.8 lives over 15 years for every 1,000 women screened. This result has to be seen against the adverse effects of errors in diagnosis, over-treatment, and radiation exposure.

The Cochrane analysis of screening indicates that it is "not clear whether screening does more good than harm". According to their analysis, 1 in 2,000 women will have her life prolonged by 10 years of screening, while 10 healthy women will undergo unnecessary breast cancer treatment. Additionally, 200 women will experience significant psychological stress due to false positive results.

The Cochrane Collaboration (2013) concluded after ten years that trials with adequate randomization did not find an effect of mammography screening on total cancer mortality, including breast cancer. The authors of this Cochrane review write: "If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% and that overdiagnosis and over-treatment is at 30%, it means that for every 2,000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily. Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress including anxiety and uncertainty for years because of false positive findings." The authors conclude that the time has come to re-assess whether universal mammography screening should be recommended for any age group. They state that universal screening may not be reasonable. The Nordic Cochrane Collection updated research in 2012 and stated that advances in diagnosis and treatment make mammography screening less effective today, rendering it "no longer effective". They conclude that "it therefore no longer seems reasonable to attend" for breast cancer screening at any age, and warn of misleading information on the internet.

Newman posits that screening mammography does not reduce death overall, but causes significant harm by inflicting cancer scare and unnecessary surgical interventions. The Nordic Cochrane Collection notes that advances in diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer may make breast cancer screening no longer effective in decreasing death from breast cancer, and therefore no longer recommend routine screening for healthy women as the risks might outweigh the benefits.

Of every 1,000 U.S. women who are screened, about 7% will be called back for a diagnostic session (although some studies estimate the number to be closer to 10% to 15%). About 10% of those who are called back will be referred for a biopsy. Of the 10% referred for biopsy, about 3.5% will have cancer and 6.5% will not. Of the 3.5% who have cancer, about 2 will have an early stage cancer that will be cured after treatment.

Mammography may also produce false negatives. Estimates of the numbers of cancers missed by mammography are usually around 20%. Reasons for not seeing the cancer include observer error, but more frequently it is because the cancer is hidden by other dense tissue in the breast, and even after retrospective review of the mammogram the cancer cannot be seen. Furthermore, one form of breast cancer, lobular cancer, has a growth pattern that produces shadows on the mammogram that are indistinguishable from normal breast tissue.

Mortality
The Cochrane Collaboration states that the best quality evidence does not demonstrate a reduction in mortality or a reduction in mortality from all types of cancer from screening mammography.

The Canadian Task Force found that for women ages 50 to 69, screening 720 women once every 2 to 3 years for 11 years would prevent one death from breast cancer. For women ages 40 to 49, 2,100 women would need to be screened at the same frequency and period to prevent a single death from breast cancer.

Women whose breast cancer was detected by screening mammography before the appearance of a lump or other symptoms commonly assume that the mammogram "saved their lives". In practice, the vast majority of these women received no practical benefit from the mammogram. There are four categories of cancers found by mammography:
 * 1) Cancers that are so easily treated that a later detection would have produced the same rate of cure (women would have lived even without mammography).
 * 2) Cancers so aggressive that even early detection is too late to benefit the patient (women who die despite detection by mammography).
 * 3) Cancers that would have receded on their own or are so slow-growing that the woman would die of other causes before the cancer produced symptoms (mammography results in over-diagnosis and over-treatment of this class).
 * 4) A small number of breast cancers that are detected by screening mammography and whose treatment outcome improves as a result of earlier detection.

Only 3% to 13% of breast cancers detected by screening mammography will fall into this last category. Clinical trial data suggests that 1 woman per 1,000 healthy women screened over 10 years falls into this category. Screening mammography produces no benefit to any of the remaining 87% to 97% of women. The probability of a woman falling into any of the above four categories varies with age.

A 2016 review for the United States Preventive Services Task Force found that mammography was associated with an 8%-33% decrease in breast cancer mortality in different age groups, but that this decrease was not statistically significant at the age groups of 39–49 and 70–74. The same review found that mammography significantly decreased the risk of advanced cancer among women aged 50 and older by 38%, but among those aged 39 to 49 the risk reduction was a non-significant 2%. The USPSTF made their review based on data from randomized controlled trials (RCT) studying breast cancer in women between the ages of 40-49.

False positives
The goal of any screening procedure is to examine a large population of patients and find the small number most likely to have a serious condition. These patients are then referred for further, usually more invasive, testing. Thus a screening exam is not intended to be definitive; rather it is intended to have sufficient sensitivity to detect a useful proportion of cancers. The cost of higher sensitivity is a larger number of results that would be regarded as suspicious in patients without disease. This is true of mammography. The patients without disease who are called back for further testing from a screening session (about 7%) are sometimes referred to as "false positives". There is a trade-off between the number of patients with disease found and the much larger number of patients without disease that must be re-screened.

Research shows that false-positive mammograms may affect women's well-being and behavior. Some women who receive false-positive results may be more likely to return for routine screening or perform breast self-examinations more frequently. However, some women who receive false-positive results become anxious, worried, and distressed about the possibility of having breast cancer, feelings that can last for many years.

False positives also mean greater expense, both for the individual and for the screening program. Since follow-up screening is typically much more expensive than initial screening, more false positives (that must receive follow-up) means that fewer women may be screened for a given amount of money. Thus as sensitivity increases, a screening program will cost more or be confined to screening a smaller number of women.

Overdiagnosis
The central harm of mammographic breast cancer screening is overdiagnosis: the detection of abnormalities that meet the pathologic definition of cancer but will never progress to cause symptoms or death. Dr. H. Gilbert Welch, a researcher at Dartmouth College, states that "screen-detected breast and prostate cancer survivors are more likely to have been over-diagnosed than actually helped by the test." Estimates of overdiagnosis associated with mammography have ranged from 1% to 54%. In 2009, Peter C. Gotzsche and Karsten Juhl Jørgensen reviewed the literature and found that 1 in 3 cases of breast cancer detected in a population offered mammographic screening is over-diagnosed. In contrast, a 2012 panel convened by the national cancer director for England and Cancer Research UK concluded that 1 in 5 cases of breast cancer diagnosed among women who have undergone breast cancer screening are over-diagnosed. This means an over-diagnosis rate of 129 women per 10,000 invited to screening. A recent systematic review of 30 studies found that screening mammography for breast cancer among women aged 40 years and older was 12.6%.

False negatives
Mammograms also have a rate of missed tumors, or "false negatives". Accurate data regarding the number of false negatives are very difficult to obtain because mastectomies cannot be performed on every woman who has had a mammogram to determine the false negative rate. Estimates of the false negative rate depend on close follow-up of a large number of patients for many years. This is difficult in practice because many women do not return for regular mammography making it impossible to know if they ever developed a cancer. In his book The Politics of Cancer, Dr. Samuel S. Epstein claims that in women ages 40 to 49, one in four cancers are missed at each mammography. Researchers have found that breast tissue is denser among younger women, making it difficult to detect tumors. For this reason, false negatives are twice as likely to occur in pre-menopausal mammograms (Prate). This is why the screening program in the UK does not start calling women for screening mammograms until age 50.

The importance of these missed cancers is not clear, particularly if the woman is getting yearly mammograms. Research on a closely related situation has shown that small cancers that are not acted upon immediately, but are observed over periods of several years, will have good outcomes. A group of 3,184 women had mammograms that were formally classified as "probably benign". This classification is for patients who are not clearly normal but have some area of minor concern. This results not in the patient being biopsied, but rather in having early follow up mammography every six months for three years to determine whether there has been any change in status. Of these 3,184 women, 17 (0.5%) did have cancers. Most importantly, when the diagnosis was finally made, they were all still stage 0 or 1, the earliest stages. Five years after treatment, none of these 17 women had evidence of re-occurrence. Thus, small early cancers, even though not acted on immediately, were still reliably curable.

Cost-effectiveness
Breast cancer imposes a significant economic strain on communities, with the expense of treating stages three and four in the United States in 2017 amounting to approximately $127,000. While early diagnosis and screening methods are important in reducing the death rates, the cost-benefit of breast cancer screening using mammography has been unclear. A recent systematic review of three studies held in Spain, Denmark, and the United States from 2000-2019 found that digital mammography is not cost-beneficial for the healthcare system when compared to other screening methods. Therefore, increasing its frequency may cause higher costs on the healthcare system. While there may be a lack of evidence, it is suggested that digital mammography be performed every two years for ages over 50.

Arguments against the USPSTF recommendations
As the USPSTF recommendations are so influential, changing mammography screenings from 50 to 40 years of age has significant implications to public health. The major concerns regarding this update is whether breast cancer mortality has truly been increasing and if there is new evidence that the benefits of mammography are increasing.

According to National Vital Statistics System, mortality from breast cancer has been steadily decreasing in the United States from 2018 to 2021. There have also been no new randomized trials of screening mammography for women in their 40s since the previous USPSTF recommendation was made. In addition, the 8 most recent randomized trials for this age group revealed no significant effect. Instead, the USPSTF used statistical models to estimate what would happen if the starting age were lowered, assuming that screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality by 25%. This found that screening 1,000 women from 40–74 years of age, instead of 50-74, would cause 1-2 fewer breast cancer deaths per 1,000 women screened over a lifetime.

Approximately 75 percent of women diagnosed with breast cancer have no family history of breast cancer or other factors that put them at high risk for developing the disease (so screening only high-risk women misses majority of cancers). An analysis by Hendrick and Helvie, published in the American Journal of Roentgenology, showed that if USPSTF breast cancer screening guidelines were followed, approximately 6,500 additional women each year in the U.S. would die from breast cancer.

The largest (Hellquist et al) and longest running (Tabar et al) breast cancer screening studies in history re-confirmed that regular mammography screening cut breast cancer deaths by roughly a third in all women ages 40 and over (including women ages 40–49). This renders the USPSTF calculations off by half. They used a 15% mortality reduction to calculate how many women needed to be invited to be screened to save a life. With the now re-confirmed 29% (or up) figure, the number to be screened using the USPSTF formula is half of their estimate and well within what they considered acceptable by their formula.

Attendance
Many factors affect how many people attend breast cancer screenings. For example, people from minority ethnic communities are also less likely to attend cancer screening. In the UK, women of South Asian heritage are the least likely to attend breast cancer screening. Research is still needed to identify specific barriers for the different South Asian communities. For example, a study showed that British-Pakistani women faced cultural and language barriers and were not aware that breast screening takes place in a female-only environment.

People with mental illnesses are also less likely to attend cancer screening appointments. In Northern Ireland women with mental health problems were shown to be less likely to attend screening for breast cancer, than women without. The lower attendance numbers remained the same even when marital status and social deprivation were taken into account.

Regulation
Mammography facilities in the United States and its territories (including military bases) are subject to the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA). The act requires annual inspections and accreditation every three years through an FDA-approved body. Facilities found deficient during the inspection or accreditation process can be barred from performing mammograms until corrective action has been verified or, in extreme cases, can be required to notify past patients that their exams were sub-standard and should not be relied upon.

At this time, MQSA applies only to traditional mammography and not to related scans, such as breast ultrasound, stereotactic breast biopsy, or breast MRI.

As of September 10, 2024, the MQSA requires that all patients be notified of their breast density ("dense" or "not dense") in their mammogram reports.

Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms
Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) programs have been developed to utilize features from screening mammography images to predict breast cancer risk. A systematic review of 16 retrospective study designs comparing median maximum AUC found that artificial intelligence had a comparable or better accuracy (AUC = 0.72) of predicting breast cancer than clinical risk factors alone (AUC = 0.61), suggesting a transition from clinical risk factor-based to AI image-based risk models may lead to more accurate and personalized risk-based screening approaches.

Another study of 32 published papers involving 23,804 mammograms and various machine learning methods (CNN, ANN, and SVM) found promising results in the ability to assist clinicians in large-scale population-based breast cancer screening programs.

Alternative examination methods
For patients who do not want to undergo mammography, MRI and also breast computed tomography (also called breast CT) offer a painless alternative. Whether the respective method is suitable depends on the clinical picture; it is decided by the physician.

title: Mammography


text:
Superplasticity

In materials science, superplasticity is a state in which solid crystalline material is deformed well beyond its usual breaking point, usually over about 400% during tensile deformation. Such a state is usually achieved at high homologous temperature. Examples of superplastic materials are some fine-grained metals and ceramics. Other non-crystalline materials (amorphous) such as silica glass ("molten glass") and polymers also deform similarly, but are not called superplastic, because they are not crystalline; rather, their deformation is often described as Newtonian fluid. Superplastically deformed material gets thinner in a very uniform manner, rather than forming a "neck" (a local narrowing) that leads to fracture. Also, the formation of microvoids, which is another cause of early fracture, is inhibited. Superplasticity must not be confused with superelasticity.

Historical developments of superplasticity
Some evidence of superplastic-like flow in metals has been found in some artifacts, such as in Wootz steels in ancient India, even though superplasticity was first scientific recognition in the twentieth century in the report on 163% elongation in brass by Bengough in 1912. Later, Jenkins' higher elongation of 300% in Cd–Zn and Pb–Sn alloys in 1928. However, those works did not go further to set a new phenomenon of mechanical properties of materials. Until the work of Pearson was published in 1934, a significant elongation of 1950% was found in Pb–Sn eutectic alloy. It was easy to become the most extensive elongation report in scientific investigation at this time. There was no further interest in superplasticity in the Western World for more than 25 years after Pearson's effort. Later, Bochvar and Sviderskaya continued superplasticity in the Soviet Union with many publications on Zn–Al alloys. A research institute focused on superplasticity, the Institute of Metals Superplasticity Problems, was established in 1985 in Ufa City, Russia. This institute has remained the only global institute to work exclusively to research in superplasticity. The interest in superplasticity rose in 1982 when the first major international conference on 'Superplasticity in Structural Materials, edited by Paton and Hamilton, was held in San Diego. From there, numerous investigations have been published with considerable results. Superplasticity is now the background for superplastic deformation forming as an essential aerospace application technique.

Conditions
In metals and ceramics, requirements for it being superplastic include a fine grain size (less than approximately 10 micrometers) and an operating temperature that is often from above a half absolute melting point. Several studies have found superplasticity in coarse-grain materials. However, the scientific community has agreed the grain size threshold at 10 micrometers is the precondition for activating superplasticity. Generally, grain growth at high-temperature, therefore maintaining the fine grain size structure at homologous temperature, is the main challenge in superplasticity research. The typical microstructure strategy uses a fine dispersion of thermally stable particles, which pin the grain boundaries and maintain the fine grain structure at the high temperatures and existence of multiple phases required for superplastic deformation. The alloy's most typical microstructure for superplasticity is eutectic or eutectoid structure, as found in Sn-Pb, or Zn-Alloy alloys. Those materials that meet these parameters must still have a strain rate sensitivity (a measurement of the way the stress on a material reacts to changes in strain rate) of >0.3 to be considered superplastic. The ideal strain rate sensitivity is 0.5, typically found in micro duplex alloys.

Mechanism
The mechanisms of superplasticity in metals are determined as the Grain Boundary Sliding (GBS). However, the grain boundary sliding (GBS) can lead to the stress concentration at the triple junction or the grain boundary of the hard phases. Therefore, the GBS in polycrystal structured materials must be accompanied by other accommodation processes such as diffusion or dislocation. The diffusion models proposed by Ashby and Verall explain a gradual change in grain shapes to maintain the compatibility between the grains during the deformation. The changes in grain shape are operated by diffusion. The grain boundary migrates to form an equiaxed shape with a new orientation compared to the original grains. The dislocation model is explained as the stress concentration by GBS will be relaxed by dislocation motion in the blocking grains. The dislocation piles up, and the climb would allow another dislocation to be emitted. The further detail in dislocation model is still under debate, with several proposed by Crossman and Ashby, Langdon, and Gifkins model.

High strain Rate Superplasticity
In general, superplasticity often occurs at a slow strain rate, in order of 10−4 s−1, and can be energy-consuming. In addition, prolonged time exposed to high-operation temperature also degraded the mechanical properties of materials. There is a strong demand to increase the strain rate in superplastic deformation to the order of 10−2 s−1, called High strain Rate Superplasticity (HSRS). Increment of strain rate in superplastic deformation is generally achieved by reduction of grain size in the ultrafine range from 100 to less than 500 ums. Further grain refinement to nanocrystalline structure with grain size less than 100 nm is ineffective in raising the deformation rate or improving ductility. The most common grain refinement process for HSRS research uses Severe Plastic Deformation (SPD). SPD can fabricate exceptional grain refinement to the sub-micrometer or even the nanometer range. Among many SPD techniques, the two most widely used techniques are equal-channel angular pressing (ECAP) and high-pressure torsion (HPT). Besides producing the ultrafine grain size, these techniques also provide a high fraction of high-angle boundaries. These high-angle grain boundaries are a specific benefit to increase the strain rates of deformation. Of the importance of grain refinement processing to superplasticity research, ECAP and HPT have been devoted to mainstream positions in superplasticity studies in metals.

Advantages of superplastic forming
The process offers a range of important benefits, from both the design and production aspects. To begin with there is the ability to form components with double curvature and smooth contours from single sheet in one operation, with exceptional dimensional accuracy and surface finish, and none of the "spring back" associated with cold forming techniques. Because only single surface tools are employed, lead times are short and prototyping is both rapid and easy, because a range of sheet alloy thicknesses can be tested on the same tool.

Forming techniques
There are three forming techniques currently in use to exploit these advantages. The method chosen depends upon design and performance criteria such as size, shape, and alloy characteristics.

Cavity forming
A graphite-coated blank is put into a heated hydraulic press. Air pressure is then used to force the sheet into close contact with the mould. At the beginning, the blank is brought into contact with the die cavity, hindering the forming process by the blank/die interface friction. Thus, the contact areas divide the single bulge into a number of bulges, which are undergoing a free bulging process. The procedure allows the production of parts with relatively exact outer contours. This forming process is suitable for the manufacturing of parts with smooth, convex surfaces.

Bubble forming
A graphite coated blank is clamped over a 'tray' containing a heated male mould. Air pressure forces the metal into close contact with the mould. The difference between this and the female forming process is that the mould is, as stated, male and the metal is forced over the protruding form. For the female forming the mould is female and the metal is forced into the cavity. The tooling consists of two pressure Chambers and a counter punch, which is linearly displaceable. Similar to the cavity forming technology, at the process beginning, the firmly clamped blank is bulged by gas pressure.

The second phase of the process involves the material being formed over the punch surface by applying a pressure against the previous forming direction. Due to a better material use, which is caused by process conditions, blanks with a smaller initial thickness compared to cavity forming can be used. Thus, the bubble forming technology is particularly suitable for parts with high forming depths.

Diaphragm forming
A graphite coated blank is placed into a heated press. Air pressure is used to force the metal into a bubble shape before the male mold is pushed into the underside of the bubble to make an initial impression. Air pressure is then used from the other direction to final form the metal around the male mould. This process has long cycle times because the superplastic strain rates are low. Product also suffers from poor creep performance due to the small grain sizes and there can be cavitation porosity in some alloys. Surface texture is generally good however. With dedicated tooling, dies and machines are costly. The main advantage of the process is that it can be used to produce large complex components in one operation. This can be useful for keeping the mass down and avoiding the need for assembly work, a particular advantage for aerospace products. For example, the diaphragm-forming method (DFM) can be used to reduce the tensile flow stress generated in a specific alloy matrix composite during deformation.

Aluminium and aluminium based alloys
Superplastically formed (SPF) aluminium alloys have the ability to be stretched to several times their original size without failure when heated to between 470 and 520 °C. These dilute alloys containing zirconium, later known by the trade name SUPRAL, were heavily cold worked to sheet and dynamically crystallized to a fine stable grain size, typically 4–5 μm, during the initial stages of hot deformation. Also superplastic forming is a net-shape processing technology that dramatically decreases fabrication and assembly costs by reducing the number of parts and the assembly requirements. Using SPF technology, it was anticipated that a 50% manufacturing cost reduction can be achieved for many aircraft assemblies, such as the nose cone and nose barrel assemblies. Other spin-offs include weight reduction, elimination of thousands of fasteners, elimination of complex featuring and a significant reduction in the number of parts. The breakthrough for superplastic Al-Cu alloys was made by Stowell, Watts and Grimes in 1969 when the first of several dilute aluminium alloys (Al-6% Cu-0.5%Zr) was rendered superplastic with the introduction of relatively high levels of zirconium in solution using specialized casting techniques and subsequent electrical treatment to create extremely fine ZrAl3 precipitates.

Commercial alloys
Some commercial alloys have been thermo-mechanically processed to develop superplasticity. The main effort has been on the Al 7000 series alloys, Al-Li alloys, Al-based metal-matrix composites, and mechanically alloyed materials.

Aluminium alloy composites
Aluminium alloy and its composites have wide applications in automotive industries. At room temperature, composites usually have higher strength compared to its component alloy. At high temperature, aluminium alloy reinforced by particles or whiskers such as SiO2, Si3N4, and SiC can have tensile elongation more than 700%. The composites are often fabricated by powder metallurgy to ensure fine grain sizes and the good dispersion of reinforcements. The grain size that allows the optimal superplastic deformation to happen is usually 0.5~1 μm, less than the requirement of conventional superplasticity. Just like other superplastic materials, the strain rate sensitivity m is larger than 0.3, indicating good resistance against local necking phenomenon. A few aluminium alloy composites such as 6061 series and 2024 series have shown high strain rate superplasticity, which happens in a much higher strain rate regime than other superplastic materials. This property makes aluminium alloy composites potentially suitable for superplastic forming because the whole process can be done in a short time, saving time and energy.

Deformation mechanism for aluminium alloy composites
The most common deformation mechanism in aluminium alloy composites is grain boundary sliding (GBS), which is often accompanied by atom/dislocation diffusion to accommodate deformation. The GBS mechanism model predicts a strain rate sensitivity of 0.3, which agrees with most of the superplastic aluminium alloy composites. Grain boundary sliding requires the rotation or migration of very fine grains at relatively high temperature. Therefore, the refinement of grain size and the prevention of grain growth at high temperature is of importance.

The very high temperature (close to melting point) is also said to be related to another mechanism, interfacial sliding, because at high temperatures, partial liquids appear in the matrix. The viscosity of the liquid plays the main role to accommodate the sliding of adjacent grain boundaries. The cavitation and stress concentration caused by the addition of second phase reinforcements are inhibited by the flow of liquid phase. However, too much liquid leads to voids thus deteriorating the stability of the materials. So temperature close to but not exceeding too much the initial melting point is often the optimal temperature. The partial melting could lead to the formation of filaments at the fracture surface, which can be observed under scanning electron microscope. The morphology and chemistry of reinforcements also have influence on the superplasticity of some composites. But no single criterion has yet been proposed to predict their influences.

Methods to improve superplasticity
A few ways have been suggested to optimize the superplastic deformation of aluminium alloy composites, which are also indicative for other materials:

 * 1) Good dispersion of reinforcements. This is also important for room-temperature performance.
 * 2) Refine the grain size of the matrix. The refinement creates more grains that can slide over each other at high temperature, facilitating the grain boundary sliding mechanism. This also implies a higher optimal strain rate. The trend of increase in strain rate has been observed in materials of finer grain sizes. Severe plastic deformation like equal-channel angular pressing has been reported to be able to achieve ultra-fine grained materials.
 * 3) Appropriately choosing the temperature and the strain rate. Some composites have to be heated close to melting, which might have opposite effects on other composites.

Titanium and titanium based alloys
In the aerospace industry, Titanium alloys such as Ti–6Al–4V find extensive use in aerospace applications, not only because of their specific high temperature strength, but also because a large number of these alloys exhibit superplastic behavior. Superplastic sheet thermoforming has been identified as a standard processing route for the production of complex shapes, especially and are amenable to superplastic forming (SPF). However, in these alloys the additions of vanadium make them considerably expensive and so, there is a need for developing superplastic titanium alloys with cheaper alloying additions. The Ti-Al-Mn alloy could be such a candidate material. This alloy shows significant post-uniform deformation at ambient and near-ambient temperatures.

Ti-Al-Mn (OT4-1) alloy
Ti-Al-Mn (OT4-1) alloy is currently being used for aero engine components as well as other aerospace applications by forming through a conventional route that is typically cost, labour and equipment intensive. The Ti-Al-Mn alloy is a candidate material for aerospace applications. However, there is virtually little or no information available on its superplastic forming behaviour. In this study, the high temperature superplastic bulge forming of the alloy was studied and the superplastic forming capabilities are demonstrated.

The bulging process
The gas pressure bulging of metal sheets has become an important forming method. As the bulging process progresses, significant thinning in the sheet material becomes obvious. Many studies were made to obtain the dome height with respect to the forming time useful to the process designer for the selection of initial blank thickness as well as non-uniform thinning in the dome after forming.

Case study
The Ti-Al-Mn (OT4-1) alloy was available in the form of a 1 mm thick cold-rolled sheet. The chemical composition of the alloy. A 35-ton hydraulic press was used for the superplastic bulge forming of a hemisphere. A die set-up was fabricated and assembled with the piping system enabling not only the inert gas flushing of the die- assembly prior to forming, but also for the forming of components under reverse pressure, if needed. The schematic diagram of the superplastic forming set-up used for bulge forming with all necessary attachments and the photograph of the top (left) and bottom (right) die for SPF.

A circular sheet (blank) of 118 mm diameter was cut from the alloy sheet and the cut surfaces polished to remove burrs. The blank was placed on the die and the top chamber brought in contact. The furnace was switched on to the set temperature. Once the set temperature was reached the top chamber was brought down further to effect the required blank holder pressure. About 10 minutes were allowed for thermal equilibration. The argon gas cylinder was opened to the set pressure gradually. Simultaneously, the linear variable differential transformer (LVDT), fitted at the bottom of the die, was set for recording the sheet bulge. Once the LVDT reached 45 mm (radius of bottom die), gas pressure was stopped and the furnace switched off. The formed components were taken out when the temperature of the die set had dropped to 600 °C. Easy removal of the component was possible at this stage. Superplastic bulge forming of hemispheres were carried out at temperatures of 1098, 1123, 1148, 1173, 1198 and 1223 K (825, 850, 875, 900, 925 and 950 °C) at forming pressures of 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.87 MPa. As the bulge forming process progresses, significant thinning in the sheet material becomes obvious. An ultrasonic technique was used to measure the thickness distribution on the profile of the formed component. The components were analyzed in terms of the thickness distribution, thickness strain and thinning factor. Post deformation micro-structural studies were conducted on the formed components in order to analyze the microstructure in terms of grain growth, grain elongation, cavitations, etc.

Results and discussions
The microstructure of the as-received material with a two-dimensional grain size of 14 μm is shown in Fig. 8. The grain size was determined using the linear intercept method in both the longitudinal and transverse directions of the rolled sheet.

Successful superplastic forming of hemispheres were carried out at temperatures of 1098, 1123, 1148, 1173, 1198 and 1223 K and argon gas forming pressures of 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8 MPa. A maximum time limit of 250 minutes was given for the complete forming of the hemispheres. This cut-off time of 250 minutes was given for practical reasons. Fig. 9 shows a photo-graph of the blank (specimen) and a bulge formed component (temperature of 1123 K and a forming gas pressure of 0.6 MPa).

The forming times of successfully formed components at different forming temperatures and pressures. From the travel of the LVDT fitted at the bottom of the die (which measured the bulge height/depth) an estimate of the rate of forming was obtained. It was seen that the rate of forming was rapid initially and decreased gradually for all the temperature and pressure ranges as reported in Table 2. At a particular temperature, the forming time reduced as the forming pressure was increased. Similarly at a given forming pressure, forming time decreased with an increase in temperature.

The thickness of the bulge profile was measured at 7 points including the periphery (base) and pole. These points were selected by taking the line between centre of the hemisphere and base point as reference and offsetting by 15° until the pole point was reached. Hence the points 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 subtend an angle of 15°, 30°, 45°, 60° and 75° respectively with the base of the hemisphere as shown in Fig. 10. The thickness was measured at each of these points on the bulge profile by using an ultrasonic technique. The thickness values for each of the successfully formed hemispherical components.

Fig. 11 shows the pole thickness of fully formed hemispheres as a function of forming pressure at different temperatures. At a particular temperature the pole thickness reduced as the forming pressure was increased. For all the cases studied the pole thickness lay in the range of about 0.3 to 0.4 mm from the original blank thickness of 1 mm.

The thickness strain $$\text{ln}(S/S_0)$$, where $$S$$ is the local thickness and $$S_0$$ is the initial thickness, was calculated at different locations for all the successfully formed components. For a particular pressure the thickness strain reduced as the forming temperature was increased. Fig. 12 shows the thickness strain, $$\text{ln}(S/S_0)$$ as a function of position along the dome cross section in case of a component formed at 1123 K at a forming pressure of 0.6 MPa.

The post-formed microstructure revealed that there was no significant change in grain size. Fig. 13 shows the microstructure of the bulge formed component at the base and the pole for a component formed at a temperature of 1148 K and forming pressure of 0.6 MPa. These microstructures show no significant change in grain size.

Conclusion
The high temperature deformation behaviour and superplastic forming capability of a Ti-Al-Mn alloy was studied. Successful forming of 90 mm diameter hemispheres using the superplastic route were carried out at the temperature range of 1098 to 1223 K and forming pressure range of 0.2 to 0.8 MPa. The following conclusions could be drawn:
 * 1) The forming time decreased steeply when the gas pressure or temperature was increased. The rate of forming was initially high, but reduced progressively with time.
 * 2) At a particular temperature the pole thickness reduced as the forming pressure was increased. For all the cases studied the pole thickness lay in the range of about 0.3 to 0.4 mm from the original blank thickness of 1.0 mm.
 * 3) The thinning factor and thickness strain increased as one moved from the periphery to the pole. The post-formed microstructures show no significant change in grain size.

Iron and steel
Mostly on non-qualified materials, such as austenitic steel of the Fe-Mn-Al alloy, which has some of the specific material parameters closely related to microstructural mechanisms. These parameters are used as indicators of material superplastic potentiality. The material was submitted to hot tensile testing, within a temperature range from 600 °C to 1000 °C and strain-rates varying from 10−6 to 1 s−1. The strain rate sensitivity parameter (m) and observed maximum elongation until rupture (εr) could be determined and also obtained from the hot tensile test.

Fe with Mn and Al alloys
The experiments stated a possibility of superplastic behaviour in a Fe-Mn-Al alloy within a temperature range from 700 °C to 900 °C with grain size around 3 μm (ASTM grain size 12) and average strain rate sensitivity of m ~ 0.54, as well as a maximum elongation at rupture around 600%.

Fe with Al and Ti alloys
The superplastic behaviour of Fe-28Al, Fe-28Al-2Ti and Fe-28Al-4Ti alloys has been investigated by tensile testing, optical microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. Tensile tests were performed at 700–900 °C under a strain rate range of about 10−5 to 10−2/s. The maximum strain rate sensitivity index m was found to be 0.5 and the largest elongation reached 620%. In Fe3Al and Fe Al alloys with grain sizes of 100 to 600μm exhibit all deformation characteristics of conventional fine grain size superplastic alloys.

However, superplastic behaviour was found in large-grained iron aluminides without the usual requisites for superplasticity of a fine grain size and grain boundary sliding. Metallographic examinations have shown that the average grain size of large-grained iron aluminides decreased during superplastic deformation.

The properties of ceramics
The properties of ceramic materials, like all materials, are dictated by the types of atoms present, the types of bonding between the atoms, and the way the atoms are packed together. This is known as the atomic scale structure. Most ceramics are made up of two or more elements. This is called a compound. For example, alumina (Al2O3), is a compound made up of aluminium atoms and oxygen atoms.

The atoms in ceramic materials are held together by a chemical bond. The two most common chemical bonds for ceramic materials are covalent and ionic. For metals, the chemical bond is called the metallic bond. The bonding of atoms together is much stronger in covalent and ionic bonding than in metallic. That is why, generally speaking, metals are ductile and ceramics are brittle. Due to ceramic materials wide range of properties, they are used for a multitude of applications. In general, most ceramics are:
 * hard
 * wear-resistant
 * brittle
 * refractory
 * thermal insulators
 * electrical insulator
 * nonmagnetic
 * oxidation resistant
 * prone to thermal shock
 * good chemical stability

High-strain-rate superplasticity has been observed in aluminium-based and magnesium-based alloys. But for ceramic materials, superplastic deformation has been restricted to low strain rates for most oxides, and nitrides with the presence of cavities leading to premature failure. Here we show that a composite ceramic material consisting of tetragonal zirconium oxide, magnesium aluminates spinal and alpha-alumina phase exhibit superplasticity at strain rates up to 1.0 s−1. The composite also exhibits a large tensile elongation, exceeding 1050% or a strain rate of 0.4 s−1. Superplastic metals and ceramics have the ability to deform over 100% without fracturing, permitting net-shape forming at high temperatures. These intriguing materials deform primarily by grain boundary sliding, a process accelerated with a fine grain size. However, most ceramics that start with a fine grain size experience rapid grain growth during high temperature deformation, rendering them unsuitable for extended superplastic forming. One can limit grain growth using a minor second phase (Zener pinning) or by making a ceramic with three phases, where grain to grain contact of the same phase is minimized. A research on fine grain three phase alumina-mullite(3Al2O3*2SiO2)-zirconia, with approximately equal volume fractions of the three phases, demonstrates that superplastic strain rates as high as 10−2/sec at 1500 °C can be reached. These high strain rates put ceramic superplastic forming into the realm of commercial feasibility.

Cavitations
Superplastic forming will only work if cavitations don't occur during grain boundary sliding, those cavitations leaving either diffusion accommodation or dislocation generation as mechanisms for accommodating grain boundary sliding. The applied stresses during ceramic superplastic forming are moderate, usually 20–50 MPa, usually not high enough to generate dislocations in single crystals, so that should rule out dislocation accommodation. Some unusual and unique features of these three phase superplastic ceramics will be revealed, however, indicating that superplastic ceramics may have a lot more in common with metals than previously thought.

Yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystalline
Yttrium oxide is used as the stabilizer. This material is predominantly tetragonal in structure. Y-TZP has the highest flexural strength of all the zirconia based materials. The fine grain size of Y-TZP lends itself to be used in cutting tools where a very sharp edge can be achieved and maintained due to its high wear resistance. It is considered to be the first true polycrystalline ceramic shown to be superplastic with a 3-mol % Y-TZP (3Y-TZP), which is now considered to be the model ceramic system. The fine grade size leads to a very dense, non-porous ceramic with excellent mechanical strength, corrosion resistance, impact toughness, thermal shock resistance and very low thermal conductivity. Due to its characteristics Y-TZP is used in wear parts, cutting tools and thermal barrier coatings.

Grain size
Superplastic properties of 3Y-TZP is greatly affected by grain size as displaced in Fig. 3, elongation to failure decreases and flow strength increases while grain size increases. A study was made on the dependence of flow stress on grain size, the result –in summary- shows that the flow stress approximately depends on the grain size squared:
 * $$\sigma \propto d^2\,$$

Where:
 * $$\sigma\,$$ is the flow stress.
 * d is the instantaneous grain size.

Alumina (Al2O3)
Alumina is probably one of the most widely used structural ceramics, but superplasticity is difficult to obtain in alumina, as a result of rapid anisotropic grain growth during high-temperature deformation. Regardless of which, several studies have been performed on superplasticity in doped, fine-grain Al2O3.Demonstrated that the grain size of Al2O3 containing 500-ppm MgO can be further refined by adding various dopants, such as Cr2O3, Y2O3, and TiO2. A grain size of about 0.66 μm was obtained in a 500-ppm Y23-doped Al2O3. As a result of this fine grain size, the Al2O3 exhibits a rupture elongation of 65% at 1450 °C under an applied stress of 20 MPa.

title: Superplasticity


text:
Khaosai Galaxy

Khaosai Galaxy (เขาทราย แกแล็คซี่, born, 15 May 1959) is a Thai former professional boxer and Muay Thai fighter who competed between 1980 and 1991. He held the WBA super-flyweight title between November 1984 and December 1991. He is listed #19 on Ring Magazine's list of 100 greatest punchers of all time and named him the 43rd greatest fighter of the past 80 years in 2002. As of 2022, BoxRec rates him as the best Thai boxer of all time, pound for pound.

Muay Thai career
Khaosai was born as Sura Saenkham (สุระ แสนคำ) in Phetchabun Province, Northern Thailand. He was a Muay Thai fighter in the early 1980s, and took the professional name Galaxy from a restaurant and nightclub owned by his manager's friend. Khaosai had tremendous punching power, particularly in his soon-to-be legendary left hand. On the advice of his manager and trainer, he switched to Marquis of Queensbury style and began training as a western style boxer.

In Muay Thai his ring names are Daoden Muangsithep (ดาวเด่น เมืองศรีเทพ) and Khaosai Wangchomphu. (เขาทราย วังชมภู)

He praised his mother as the first trainer, because she was fond of boxing and Muay Thai. Due to he and his twin brother Khaokor Galaxy were born during the time that Pone Kingpetch, the first Thai world champion, was becoming famous.

His mother would wake them up at 4.00 a.m. for a run before school, along with supporting everything for the twins to fight.

Boxing style
Lacking the amateur boxing experience common to most Western professional boxers, Khaosai's skills originally were limited, and he relied on toughness and his fearsome punching power to win. His southpaw style was based on closing his opponent and firing his left hand whenever he saw an opening. His right hand was used mainly to judge the distance for his left.

As he gained experience, Khaosai began to develop into a more refined boxer, learning combination punching to complement his deadly left. His favorite punch, a straight left to the midsection, translates roughly as "the left hand that drills intestines." Incredibly strong, he was never out-muscled, while opponents who tried the traditional stick-and-move techniques found he had quick feet and was able to block their movements.

Professional boxing career
Khaosai began his international style boxing career in December 1980. He won all of his first six fights, which earned him a shot at the Thailand bantamweight (118-pound) title on 1981 against Sakda Saksuree. He lost on a points decision. It was to be the last fight he would ever lose in the ring.

Khaosai won his next three fights and claimed the Thai bantamweight title in 1982. He won 15 consecutive fights by knockout and climbed in the world rankings to become super-flyweight WBA world champion Jiro Watanabe's mandatory challenger by the summer of 1984.

When Watanabe failed to defend his title against Khaosai, the WBA stripped him and matched Khaosai against undefeated Eusebio Espinal for the vacant championship on 1984. Khaosai knocked out Espinal in the sixth round, beginning the longest title reign in his division's history.

Khaosai defended his WBA title 19 times over the next seven years, winning 16 of his title fights by knockouts. In the mid-1980s, when world heavyweight champion Mike Tyson was in his prime and scoring knockouts over everyone, boxing fans nicknamed Khaosai The Thai Tyson for knockout wins.

Khaosai fought only once outside of Asia, when he defended his title in 1986 against unbeaten (and future WBA bantamweight titleholder) Israel Contreras in Curaçao. He had two title fights in Kōbe, Japan, one in South Korea and one at Bung Karno Stadium, Indonesia. The rest were in Thailand, where he often fought for purses in excess of $100,000 in front of huge crowds. That, plus the fact that few top fighters anywhere were willing to challenge Khaosai, made him relatively unknown in the West.

In 1988, his twin younger brother, fighting under the name Kaokhor Galaxy, captured the WBA bantamweight title, making the Galaxy brothers (Saenkham brothers) the first twins to ever be world boxing champions.

Retirement
He fought for the last time on December 22, 1991 in Bangkok, beating Armando Castro over 12 rounds. A few weeks later, he announced his retirement with a record of 47 wins against only one defeat, and never attempted a comeback.

Life after boxing
Not long after his retirement to the boxing profession, Khaosai chose to take part in the Thai entertainment industry. He first took a shot at the music industry, releasing a single, "Khob Khun Krub", meaning "Thank You", then began taking part in TV series and movies, particularly comedies. His first role as an actor occurred during the TV series Poot Mae Nam Khong (1992 version), which was then followed by Mon Rak Luk Thung (1995 version), The Legend of Suriyothai (2001), and The Bodyguard (2004) etc. In 2005, while he was taking part in a film, he was punched in the face by a drunken fan, who wished to obtain Khaosai's shirt for collection but was denied. The incident made frontline news, which displayed a photo of Khaosai, with a bandage on his face but smiling and standing next to the drunk man.

In 2006, he starred in a music video for a song by fellow boxers Somluck Kamsing and Samart Payakaroon. In the video, Khaosai portrayed a shy man being approached by a young woman.

After retirement, he married the Japanese Yumiko Ota, whom he had met during a trip for his second fight with Kenji Matsumura in Kōbe, Japan in 1989. The couple lived together for only one year, and later divorced.

He later married a Buriram woman, Sureerat "Fah" Saenkham (née Niwesram). They had no children together, but Khaosai chose to take his wife's nephew as a stepchild.

In March 2013, he made news again when he unexpectedly was married again, this time to Wannapa "Nung" Kamboonsri, before obtaining a legal divorce from his previous wife. The same year, he became a father for the first time at the age of 54, when his wife safely delivered a daughter. In 2016, his wife delivered a second daughter by the end of the year.

Currently, he owns two Muay Thai gyms, one located in Bangkok and another in Phuket. He was a trainer for Denkaosan Kaovichit in the fight against Takefumi Sakata which took place by the end of 2008 in Yokohama, Japan. (Denkaosan knocked his opponent out by the second round, becoming the next WBA flyweight champion).

Besides boxing and entertainment, Khaosai has also flirted with politics. During the 2007 Thai general election, he was a candidate in the party-list of the Puea Pandin Party, but lost. Additionally, during the 2011 Thai general election, he became a candidate on behalf of the Chartthaipattana Party for his native Phetchabun 2nd district, but lost with only 8,485 votes.

Legacy
He was selected to the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 1999 and remains a well known boxer throughout Thailand.

Every time he fought, there was a saying that traffic in Bangkok was good, because everyone rushed home to see him on TV.

title: Khaosai Galaxy


text:
Stolin

Stolin (Столін; Столин; Столін, Столин; Stolin; סטולין) is a town in Brest Region, Belarus. It serves as the administrative center of Stolin District, the largest district in the region. Stolin is located 15 km from the Belarus–Ukraine border. As of 2024, it has a population of 13,785.

Stolin is a border city that hosts many Ukrainians on market days. Russian is spoken commonly here, but villagers prefer their own dialects that are akin partly to the Belarusian language, partly the Ukrainian language.

History
Stolin is located at the heart of the Polesia region on the Horyn River, at the crossroads of two important routes, one leading northwards to Pinsk, two others eastwards to Davyd-Haradok and Turov, that are now in Belarus, southwards to Sarny and Kyiv, that are now in Ukraine.

Archaeological evidence suggests that the area which Stolin now occupies, was settled as far back as the 12th century AD. The first mention of Stolin dates to 1555. There are three stories regarding the origins of the name "Stolin". The first refers to a group of local fisherman who cast their fishing nets into a lake a pulled out 100 fish or Sto [100 in Russian] "Leeni" [a type of local fish]. The second story refers to a ferry-boat which sunk in the river and required 100 men with 100 ropes to drag it out [100 lines in Russian]. The third refers to twelve brothers who ruled over seven nearby cities and chose what became Stolin as their meeting place and capital city, hence the name may be a derivation of stol (table)> Stolny Gorod (capital city).

Stolin was occupied by the Germans from July 1941 to 1944. In August 1941, many Jewish refugees – especially women and children – from the nearby town of David-Gorodok came to Stolin. A ghetto was created in May 1942, surrounded by a barbed-wire fence. About 7,000 Jews lived in this small and unhealthy area, along the Bank River. The liquidation of the ghetto was conducted on September 11, 1942, by a squadron of German cavalry, the local police and the SD. The shooting took place near the airfield, in a large ditch.

International relations
Stolin is twinned with:
 * 🇩🇪 Homberg, Germany

title: Stolin