In this paper, we present a new methodology for developing systematic and automatic test generation algorithms for multipoint protocols. These algorithms attempt to synthesize network topologies and sequences of events that stress the protocol's correctness or performance. This problem can be viewed as a domain-specific search problem that suffers from the state space explosion problem. One goal of this work is to circumvent the state space explosion problem utilizing knowledge of network and fault modeling, and multipoint protocols. The two approaches investigated in this study are based on forward and backward search techniques. We use an extended finite state machine (FSM) model of the protocol. The first algorithm uses forward search to perform reduced reachability analysis. Using domain-specific information for multicast routing over LANs, the algorithm complexity is reduced from exponential to polynomial in the number of routers. This approach, however, does not fully automate topology synthesis. The second algorithm, the fault-oriented test generation, uses backward search for topology synthesis and uses backtracking to generate event sequences instead of searching forward from initial states. Using these algorithms, we have conducted studies for correctness of the multicast routing protocol PIM. We propose to extend these algorithms to study end-to-end multipoint protocols using a virtual LAN that represents delays of the underlying multicast distribution tree.
Several attempts to apply formal verification to network protocols have been made. Assertional proof techniques were used to prove distance vector routing @cite_13 , path vector routing @cite_10 and route diffusion algorithms @cite_22 @cite_44 and @cite_24 using communicating finite state machines. An example point-to-point mobile application was proved using assertional reasoning in @cite_40 using UNITY @cite_42 . Axiomatic reasoning was used in proving a simple transmission protocol in @cite_38 . Algebraic systems based on the calculus of communicating systems (CCS) @cite_20 have been used to prove CSMA CD @cite_19 . Formal verification has been applied to TCP and T TCP in @cite_39 .
@cite_13 @cite_38 @cite_22 @cite_42 @cite_39 @cite_44 @cite_24 @cite_40 @cite_19 @cite_10 @cite_20
2029187109 2167056631 1985988333 2157118812 2165681304 2051922524 91133127 2056643723 2137865376
Abstract Documents in computer-readable form can be used to provide information about other documents, i.e. those they cite. To do this efficiently requires procedures for computer recognition of citing statements. This is not easy, especially for multi-sentence citing statements. Computer recognition procedures have been developed which are accurate to the following extent: 73 of the words in statements selected by computer procedures as being citing statements are words which are correctly attributable to the corresponding documents. The retrieval effectiveness of computer-recognized citing statements was tested in the following way. First, for eight retrieval requests in inorganiic chemistry, average recall by search of Chemical Abstracts Service indexing and Chemical Abstracts abstract text words was found to be 50 . Words from citing statements referring to the papers to be retrieved were then added to the index terms and abstract words as additional access points, and searching was repeated. Average recall increased to 70 . Only words from citing statements published within a year of the cited papers were used. The retrieval effect of citing statement words alone (published within a year) without index or abstract terms was the following: average recall was 40 . When just the words of the titles of the cited papers were added to those citing statement words, average recall increased to 50 . A citing sentence is one that appears in a scientific article and cites previous work. Citing sentences have been studied and used in many applications. For example, they have been used in scientific paper summarization, automatic survey generation, paraphrase identification, and citation function classification. Citing sentences that cite multiple papers are common in scientific writing. This observation should be taken into consideration when using citing sentences in applications. For instance, when a citing sentence is used in a summary of a scientific paper, only the fragments of the sentence that are relevant to the summarized paper should be included in the summary. In this paper, we present and compare three different approaches for identifying the fragments of a citing sentence that are related to a given target reference. Our methods are: word classification, sequence labeling, and segment classification. Our experiments show that segment classification achieves the best results. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations.Design methodology approach – ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets – a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self‐citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation – using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database.Findings – ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited ... Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses (Uniform Resource Locators, or URLs) “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards (robot exclusion files, no-cache and no-archive tags). Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. @PARASPLIT [J Med Internet Res 2005;7(5):e60]