In concurrency control of databases, transaction processing (transaction management), and other transactional distributed applications, global serializability (or modular serializability) is a property of a global schedule of transactions. A global schedule is the unified schedule of all the individual database (and other transactional object) schedules in a multidatabase environment (e.g., federated database). Complying with global serializability means that the global schedule is serializable, has the serializability property, while each component database (module) has a serializable schedule as well. In other words, a collection of serializable components provides overall system serializability, which is usually incorrect. A need in correctness across databases in multidatabase systems makes global serializability a major goal for global concurrency control (or modular concurrency control). With the proliferation of the Internet, Cloud computing, Grid computing, and small, portable, powerful computing devices (e.g., smartphones), as well as increase in systems management sophistication, the need for atomic distributed transactions and thus effective global serializability techniques, to ensure correctness in and among distributed transactional applications, seems to increase. In a federated database system or any other more loosely defined multidatabase system, which are typically distributed in a communication network, transactions span multiple (and possibly distributed) databases. Enforcing global serializability in such system, where different databases may use different types of concurrency control, is problematic. Even if every local schedule of a single database is serializable, the global schedule of a whole system is not necessarily serializable. The massive communication exchanges of conflict information needed between databases to reach conflict serializability globally would lead to unacceptable performance, primarily due to computer and communication latency. Achieving global serializability effectively over different types of concurrency control has been open for several years. == The global serializability problem == === Problem statement === The difficulties described above translate into the following problem: Find an efficient (high-performance and fault tolerant) method to enforce Global serializability (global conflict serializability) in a heterogeneous distributed environment of multiple autonomous database systems. The database systems may employ different concurrency control methods. No limitation should be imposed on the operations of either local transactions (confined to a single database system) or global transactions (span two or more database systems). === Quotations === Lack of an appropriate solution for the global serializability problem has driven researchers to look for alternatives to serializability as a correctness criterion in a multidatabase environment (e.g., see Relaxing global serializability below), and the problem has been characterized as difficult and open. The following two quotations demonstrate the mindset about it by the end of the year 1991, with similar quotations in numerous other articles: "Without knowledge about local as well as global transactions, it is highly unlikely that efficient global concurrency control can be provided... Additional complications occur when different component DBMSs [Database Management Systems] and the FDBMSs [Federated Database Management Systems] support different concurrency mechanisms... It is unlikely that a theoretically elegant solution that provides conflict serializability without sacrificing performance (i.e., concurrency and/or response time) and availability exists." === Proposed solutions === Several solutions, some partial, have been proposed for the global serializability problem. Among them: Global conflict graph (serializability graph, precedence graph) checking Distributed Two-phase locking (Distributed 2PL) Distributed Timestamp ordering Tickets (local logical timestamps which define local total orders, and are propagated to determine global partial order of transactions) == Relaxing global serializability == Some techniques have been developed for relaxed global serializability (i.e., they do not guarantee global serializability; see also Relaxing serializability). Among them (with several publications each): Quasi serializability Two-level serializability Another common reason nowadays for Global serializability relaxation is the requirement of availability of internet products and services. This requirement is typically answered by large scale data replication. The straightforward solution for synchronizing replicas' updates of a same database object is including all these updates in a single atomic distributed transaction. However, with many replicas such a transaction is very large, and may span several computers and networks that some of them are likely to be unavailable. Thus such a transaction is likely to end with abort and miss its purpose. Consequently, Optimistic replication (Lazy replication) is often utilized (e.g., in many products and services by Google, Amazon, Yahoo, and alike), while global serializability is relaxed and compromised for eventual consistency. In this case relaxation is done only for applications that are not expected to be harmed by it. Classes of schedules defined by relaxed global serializability properties either contain the global serializability class, or are incomparable with it. What differentiates techniques for relaxed global conflict serializability (RGCSR) properties from those of relaxed conflict serializability (RCSR) properties that are not RGCSR is typically the different way global cycles (span two or more databases) in the global conflict graph are handled. No distinction between global and local cycles exists for RCSR properties that are not RGCSR. RCSR contains RGCSR. Typically RGCSR techniques eliminate local cycles, i.e., provide local serializability (which can be achieved effectively by regular, known concurrency control methods); however, obviously they do not eliminate all global cycles (which would achieve global serializability).
Supertoroid
In geometry and computer graphics, a supertoroid or supertorus is usually understood to be a family of doughnut-like surfaces (technically, a topological torus) whose shape is defined by mathematical formulas similar to those that define the superellipsoids. The plural of "supertorus" is either supertori or supertoruses. The family was described and named by Alan Barr in 1994. Barr's supertoroids have been fairly popular in computer graphics as a convenient model for many objects, such as smooth frames for rectangular things. One quarter of a supertoroid can provide a smooth and seamless 90-degree joint between two superquadric cylinders. However, they are not algebraic surfaces (except in special cases). == Formulas == Alan Barr's supertoroids are defined by parametric equations similar to the trigonometric equations of the torus, except that the sine and cosine terms are raised to arbitrary powers. Namely, the generic point P(u, v) of the surface is given by P ( u , v ) = ( X ( u , v ) Y ( u , v ) Z ( u , v ) ) = ( ( a + C u s ) C v t ( b + C u s ) S v t S u s ) {\displaystyle P(u,v)=\left({\begin{array}{c}X(u,v)\\Y(u,v)\\Z(u,v)\end{array}}\right)=\left({\begin{array}{c}(a+C_{u}^{s})C_{v}^{t}\\(b+C_{u}^{s})S_{v}^{t}\\S_{u}^{s}\end{array}}\right)} where C θ ε = sgn ( cos θ ) | cos θ | ε , S θ ε = sgn ( sin θ ) | sin θ | ε , {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}C_{\theta }^{\varepsilon }&=\operatorname {sgn} (\cos \theta )\,\left|\,\cos \theta \,\right|^{\varepsilon },\\S_{\theta }^{\varepsilon }&=\operatorname {sgn} (\sin \theta )\ \left|\,\sin \theta \ \right|^{\varepsilon },\end{aligned}}} sgn is the sign function, and the parameters u, v range from 0 to 360 degrees (0 to 2π radians). In these formulas, the parameter s > 0 controls the "squareness" of the vertical sections, t > 0 controls the squareness of the horizontal sections, and a, b ≥ 1 are the major radii in the x and y directions. With s = t = 1 and a = b = R one obtains the ordinary torus with major radius R and minor radius 1, with the center at the origin and rotational symmetry about the z-axis. In general, the supertorus defined as above spans the intervals: − ( a + 1 ) ≤ x ≤ + ( a + 1 ) − ( b + 1 ) ≤ y ≤ + ( b + 1 ) − 1 ≤ z ≤ + 1 {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{rcccl}-(a+1)&\leq &x&\leq &+(a+1)\\[4pt]-(b+1)&\leq &y&\leq &+(b+1)\\[4pt]-1&\leq &z&\leq &+1\end{array}}} The whole shape is symmetric about the planes x = 0, y = 0, and z = 0. The hole runs in the z direction and spans the intervals − ( a − 1 ) ≤ x ≤ + ( a − 1 ) − ( b − 1 ) ≤ y ≤ + ( b − 1 ) − ∞ ≤ z ≤ + ∞ {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{rcccl}-(a-1)&\leq &x&\leq &+(a-1)\\[4pt]-(b-1)&\leq &y&\leq &+(b-1)\\[4pt]-\infty &\leq &z&\leq &+\infty \end{array}}} A curve of constant u on this surface is a horizontal Lamé curve with exponent 2 t , {\displaystyle {\tfrac {2}{t}},} scaled in x and y and displaced in z. A curve of constant v, projected on the plane x = 0 or y = 0, is a Lamé curve with exponent 2 s , {\displaystyle {\tfrac {2}{s}},} scaled and horizontally shifted. If v = 0, the curve is planar and spans the intervals: a − 1 ≤ x ≤ a + 1 − 1 ≤ z ≤ + 1 {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{rcccl}a-1&\leq &x&\leq &a+1\\[4pt]-1&\leq &z&\leq &+1\end{array}}} and similarly if v = 90°, 180°, 270°. The curve is also planar if a = b. In general, if a ≠ b and v is not a multiple of 90 degrees, the curve of constant v will not be planar; and, conversely, a vertical plane section of the supertorus will not be a Lamé curve. The basic supertoroid shape defined above is often modified by non-uniform scaling to yield supertoroids of specific width, length, and vertical thickness. == Plotting code == The following GNU Octave code generates plots of a supertorus:
Core FTP
Core FTP LE is a freeware secure FTP client for Windows, developed by CoreFTP.com. Features include FTP, SSL/TLS, SFTP via SSH, and HTTP/HTTPS support. Secure FTP clients encrypt account information and data transferred across the internet, protecting data from being seen, or sniffed across networks. Core FTP is a traditional FTP client with local files displayed on the left, remote files on the right. Core FTP Server is a secure FTP server for Windows, developed by CoreFTP.com, starting in 2010. == Licensing == CoreFTP LE is free for personal, educational, non-profit, and business use.
Recursive transition network
A recursive transition network ("RTN") is a graph theoretical schematic used to represent the rules of a context-free grammar. RTNs have application to programming languages, natural language and lexical analysis. Any sentence that is constructed according to the rules of an RTN is said to be "well-formed". The structural elements of a well-formed sentence may also be well-formed sentences by themselves, or they may be simpler structures. This is why RTNs are described as recursive. == Notes and references ==
Knowledge assessment methodology
The knowledge assessment methodology (KAM) is "an interactive benchmarking tool created by the World Bank's Knowledge for Development Program to help countries identify the challenges and opportunities they face in making the transition to the knowledge-based economy." KAM does so by providing information on knowledge economy indicators for 146 countries. Its products include the Knowledge Economy Index and the Knowledge Index.
Self-management (computer science)
Self-management is the process by which computer systems manage their own operation without human intervention. Self-management technologies are expected to pervade the next generation of network management systems. The growing complexity of modern networked computer systems is a limiting factor in their expansion. The increasing heterogeneity of corporate computer systems, the inclusion of mobile computing devices, and the combination of different networking technologies like WLAN, cellular phone networks, and mobile ad hoc networks make the conventional, manual management difficult, time-consuming, and error-prone. More recently, self-management has been suggested as a solution to increasing complexity in cloud computing. An industrial initiative towards realizing self-management is the Autonomic Computing Initiative (ACI) started by IBM in 2001. The ACI defines the following four functional areas: Self-configuration Auto-configuration of components Self-healing Automatic discovery, and correction of faults; automatically applying all necessary actions to bring system back to normal operation Self-optimization Automatic monitoring and control of resources to ensure the optimal functioning with respect to the defined requirements Self-protection Proactive identification and protection from arbitrary attacks
Lexical Markup Framework
Language resource management – Lexical markup framework (LMF; ISO 24613), produced by ISO/TC 37, is the ISO standard for natural language processing (NLP) and machine-readable dictionary (MRD) lexicons. The scope is standardization of principles and methods relating to language resources in the contexts of multilingual communication. == Objectives == The goals of LMF are to provide a common model for the creation and use of lexical resources, to manage the exchange of data between and among these resources, and to enable the merging of large number of individual electronic resources to form extensive global electronic resources. Types of individual instantiations of LMF can include monolingual, bilingual or multilingual lexical resources. The same specifications are to be used for both small and large lexicons, for both simple and complex lexicons, for both written and spoken lexical representations. The descriptions range from morphology, syntax, computational semantics to computer-assisted translation. The covered languages are not restricted to European languages but cover all natural languages. The range of targeted NLP applications is not restricted. LMF is able to represent most lexicons, including WordNet, EDR and PAROLE lexicons. == History == In the past, lexicon standardization has been studied and developed by a series of projects like GENELEX, EDR, EAGLES, MULTEXT, PAROLE, SIMPLE and ISLE. Then, the ISO/TC 37 National delegations decided to address standards dedicated to NLP and lexicon representation. The work on LMF started in Summer 2003 by a new work item proposal issued by the US delegation. In Fall 2003, the French delegation issued a technical proposition for a data model dedicated to NLP lexicons. In early 2004, the ISO/TC 37 committee decided to form a common ISO project with Nicoletta Calzolari (CNR-ILC Italy) as convenor and Gil Francopoulo (Tagmatica France) and Monte George (ANSI, United States) as editors. The first step in developing LMF was to design an overall framework based on the general features of existing lexicons and to develop a consistent terminology to describe the components of those lexicons. The next step was the actual design of a comprehensive model that best represented all of the lexicons in detail. A large panel of 60 experts contributed a wide range of requirements for LMF that covered many types of NLP lexicons. The editors of LMF worked closely with the panel of experts to identify the best solutions and reach a consensus on the design of LMF. Special attention was paid to the morphology in order to provide powerful mechanisms for handling problems in several languages that were known as difficult to handle. 13 versions have been written, dispatched (to the National nominated experts), commented and discussed during various ISO technical meetings. After five years of work, including numerous face-to-face meetings and e-mail exchanges, the editors arrived at a coherent UML model. In conclusion, LMF should be considered a synthesis of the state of the art in NLP lexicon field. == Current stage == The ISO number is 24613. The LMF specification has been published officially as an International Standard on 17 November 2008. == As one of the members of the ISO/TC 37 family of standards == The ISO/TC 37 standards are currently elaborated as high level specifications and deal with word segmentation (ISO 24614), annotations (ISO 24611 a.k.a. MAF, ISO 24612 a.k.a. LAF, ISO 24615 a.k.a. SynAF, and ISO 24617-1 a.k.a. SemAF/Time), feature structures (ISO 24610), multimedia containers (ISO 24616 a.k.a. MLIF), and lexicons (ISO 24613). These standards are based on low level specifications dedicated to constants, namely data categories (revision of ISO 12620), language codes (ISO 639), scripts codes (ISO 15924), country codes (ISO 3166) and Unicode (ISO 10646). The two level organization forms a coherent family of standards with the following common and simple rules: the high level specification provides structural elements that are adorned by the standardized constants; the low level specifications provide standardized constants as metadata. == Key standards == The linguistics constants like /feminine/ or /transitive/ are not defined within LMF but are recorded in the Data Category Registry (DCR) that is maintained as a global resource by ISO/TC 37 in compliance with ISO/IEC 11179-3:2003. And these constants are used to adorn the high level structural elements. The LMF specification complies with the modeling principles of Unified Modeling Language (UML) as defined by Object Management Group (OMG). The structure is specified by means of UML class diagrams. The examples are presented by means of UML instance (or object) diagrams. An XML DTD is given in an annex of the LMF document. == Model structure == LMF is composed of the following components: The core package that is the structural skeleton which describes the basic hierarchy of information in a lexical entry. Extensions of the core package which are expressed in a framework that describes the reuse of the core components in conjunction with the additional components required for a specific lexical resource. The extensions are specifically dedicated to morphology, MRD, NLP syntax, NLP semantics, NLP multilingual notations, NLP morphological patterns, multiword expression patterns, and constraint expression patterns. == Example == In the following example, the lexical entry is associated with a lemma clergyman and two inflected forms clergyman and clergymen. The language coding is set for the whole lexical resource. The language value is set for the whole lexicon as shown in the following UML instance diagram. The elements Lexical Resource, Global Information, Lexicon, Lexical Entry, Lemma, and Word Form define the structure of the lexicon. They are specified within the LMF document. On the contrary, languageCoding, language, partOfSpeech, commonNoun, writtenForm, grammaticalNumber, singular, plural are data categories that are taken from the Data Category Registry. These marks adorn the structure. The values ISO 639-3, clergyman, clergymen are plain character strings. The value eng is taken from the list of languages as defined by ISO 639-3. With some additional information like dtdVersion and feat, the same data can be expressed by the following XML fragment: This example is rather simple, while LMF can represent much more complex linguistic descriptions the XML tagging is correspondingly complex. == Selected publications about LMF == The first publication about the LMF specification as it has been ratified by ISO (this paper became (in 2015) the 9th most cited paper within the Language Resources and Evaluation conferences from LREC papers): Language Resources and Evaluation LREC-2006/Genoa: Gil Francopoulo, Monte George, Nicoletta Calzolari, Monica Monachini, Nuria Bel, Mandy Pet, Claudia Soria: Lexical Markup Framework (LMF) About semantic representation: Gesellschaft für linguistische Datenverarbeitung GLDV-2007/Tübingen: Gil Francopoulo, Nuria Bel, Monte George Nicoletta Calzolari, Monica Monachini, Mandy Pet, Claudia Soria: Lexical Markup Framework ISO standard for semantic information in NLP lexicons About African languages: Traitement Automatique des langues naturelles, Marseille, 2014: Mouhamadou Khoule, Mouhamad Ndiankho Thiam, El Hadj Mamadou Nguer: Toward the establishment of a LMF-based Wolof language lexicon (Vers la mise en place d'un lexique basé sur LMF pour la langue wolof) [in French] About Asian languages: Lexicography, Journal of ASIALEX, Springer 2014: Lexical Markup Framework: Gil Francopoulo, Chu-Ren Huang: An ISO Standard for Electronic Lexicons and its Implications for Asian Languages DOI 10.1007/s40607-014-0006-z About European languages: COLING 2010: Verena Henrich, Erhard Hinrichs: Standardizing Wordnets in the ISO Standard LMF: Wordnet-LMF for GermaNet EACL 2012: Judith Eckle-Kohler, Iryna Gurevych: Subcat-LMF: Fleshing out a standardized format for subcategorization frame interoperability EACL 2012: Iryna Gurevych, Judith Eckle-Kohler, Silvana Hartmann, Michael Matuschek, Christian M Meyer, Christian Wirth: UBY - A Large-Scale Unified Lexical-Semantic Resource Based on LMF. About Semitic languages: Journal of Natural Language Engineering, Cambridge University Press (to appear in Spring 2015): Aida Khemakhem, Bilel Gargouri, Abdelmajid Ben Hamadou, Gil Francopoulo: ISO Standard Modeling of a large Arabic Dictionary. Proceedings of the seventh Global Wordnet Conference 2014: Nadia B M Karmani, Hsan Soussou, Adel M Alimi: Building a standardized Wordnet in the ISO LMF for aeb language. Proceedings of the workshop: HLT & NLP within Arabic world, LREC 2008: Noureddine Loukil, Kais Haddar, Abdelmajid Ben Hamadou: Towards a syntactic lexicon of Arabic Verbs. Traitement Automatique des Langues Naturelles, Toulouse (in French) 2007: Khemakhem A, Gargouri B, Abdelwahed A, Francopoulo G: Modélisation des paradigmes de fl