Engineering PapersSearch

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “arugment”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

Timing issues in the distributed execution of Ada programs

This paper examines, in the context of distributed execution, the meaning of Ada constructs involving time. In the process, unresolved questions of interpretation and problems with the implementation of a consistent notion of time across a network are uncovered. It is observed that there are two Ada mechanisms that can involve a distributed sense of time: the conditional entry call, and the timed entry call. It is shown that a recent interpretation by the Language Maintenance Committee resolves the questions for the conditional entry calls but results in an anomaly for timed entry calls. A detailed discussion of alternative implementations for the timed entry call is made, and it is aruged that: (1) timed entry calls imply a common sense of time between the machines holding the calling and called tasks; and (2) the measurement of time for the expiration of the delay and the decision of whether or not to perform the rendezvous should be made on the machine holding the called task. The need to distinguish the unreadiness of the called task from timeouts caused by network failure is pointed out. Finally, techniques for realizing a single sense of time across the distributed system (at least to within an acceptable degree of uncertainty) are also discussed.

Volz, Richard A.

The Friendly Argument Notation (FAN)

This document defines and explains through examples the Friendly Argument Notation (FAN). FAN builds on previous work investigating text-based ways to express arguments [2, 3]. Its primary intended use is for creating and evaluating arguments about safety-critical systems, especially the types of arguments common within safety and assurance cases [4], but nothing in its design constrains its use to that domain. Compared to existing notations commonly used within this domain (for example [6]), FAN corresponds more closely to traditional argument concepts (for example [1]), allows greater flexibility in expression, provides for including counter-arguments, and requires less knowledge of computer-science-specific concepts. Only time and use will determine how beneficial these differences are in practice. This paper concentrates on showing how FAN looks to someone who is using it manually to develop or assess arguments. A later document will concentrate on providing the information necessary for software tools to be created for FAN.

arugment