The Proposed Protocols Sample Clauses

The Proposed Protocols. In this section, the proposed protocols, FDAL and VRFC, will be introduced in more detail to solve the mixed faults on links in a general network with FDA compliance. The parameters used and the assumptions made are as follows: ■ Processors used in the underlying network are assumed to be fault-free. (This can be achieved using the FDAMIX protocol [5]) ■ Let Þ be the set of all processors in the general network, and  Þ =n. ■ Each processor in the network can be uniquely identified. ■ Each processor in the general network has exactly the same initial value. (Protocol GPBA [11] can be used to achieve this status.) ■ Let La be the maximum number of arbitrary faulty links in the general network. ■ Let Ld be the maximum number of dormant faulty links in the general network. ■ Let c be the connectivity of the general network, where c > 2La+ Ld. ■ A processor does not know the fault status of the links in the general network, however, dormant faulty links can be detected [9,14] FDAL can detect/locate arbitrary faulty links, La, and dormant faulty links, Ld, within the general network, where c > 2La+ Ld. The constraint of the inequality c > 2La+ Ld is necessary, because a fault-free processor can detect dormant faults when the protocol appropriately encodes a transmitted message using either the Non-Return-to-Zero code or the Manchester code [9,14] before transmission. In the worst situation, the receiver processor is able to obtain c- Ld copies of the value from the sender processor. Where c- Ld >2La, each receiver processor is able to take the majority value among these c-Ld values. Before exercising FDAL, both of GPBA and FDAMIX must be executed to ensure that the general network is free from arbitrary and dormant faulty processors. Each fault-free processor in the general network is able to reach a common value. Thus, the common value agreed by GPBA can be used as the initial value for each fault-free processor in the general network for executing FDAL. When executing FDAL, there are four sequential phases to be considered; the message exchange phase, the fault diagnosis phase, the result exchange phase and the reconfigure phase. Only two rounds are needed for message exchange; one round for transmitting the initial value, and the other for transmitting the fault diagnosis report. The detailed definition on the proposed protocol FDAL is shown in Figure 1. Protocol FDAL (For all fault-free processor Pi with the same initial value, where 1≤ i ≤ n)
View Source
The Proposed Protocols. In this section, the detailed descriptions of our proposed protocols Group Oriented Agreement Protocol for processor (GOAPP) and Relay Fault tolerance Channel for Processor (RFCP) are shown here. Noticeable, in the BA problem, the source processor only transmits the message in the first round of message exchange. Because if the source processor is a fault-free processor then the agreement value of the source processor is its initial value, if the source processor is a faulty processor then we do not care the agreement value of the source processor [10].
View Source
The Proposed Protocols. In this section, we shall introduce our new protocols, Relay Fault-tolerance Channel (RFC) and Eventual General Agreement Protocol (EGAP), to solve the EBA problem with dual failure mode on both processors and communication media in a general network.
View Source

Related to The Proposed Protocols

  • Proposed Policies and Procedures Regarding New Online Content and Functionality By February 1, 2017, the Division will submit to OCR for its review and approval proposed policies and procedures (“the Plan for New Content”) to ensure that all new, newly-added, or modified online content and functionality will be accessible to people with disabilities as measured by conformance to the Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility set forth above, except where doing so would impose a fundamental alteration or undue burden. a) When fundamental alteration or undue burden defenses apply, the Plan for New Content will require the Division to provide equally effective alternative access. The Plan for New Content will require the Division, in providing equally effective alternate access, to take any actions that do not result in a fundamental alteration or undue financial and administrative burdens, but nevertheless ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, individuals with disabilities receive the same benefits or services as their nondisabled peers. To provide equally effective alternate access, alternatives are not required to produce the identical result or level of achievement for persons with and without disabilities, but must afford persons with disabilities equal opportunity to obtain the same result, to gain the same benefit, or to reach the same level of achievement, in the most integrated setting appropriate to the person’s needs. b) The Plan for New Content must include sufficient quality assurance procedures, backed by adequate personnel and financial resources, for full implementation. This provision also applies to the Division online content and functionality developed by, maintained by, or offered through a third-party vendor or by using open sources. c) Within thirty (30) days of receiving OCR’s approval of the Plan for New Content, the Division will officially adopt and fully implement the amended policies and procedures.

  • Protocols Each party hereby agrees that the inclusion of additional protocols may be required to make this Agreement specific. All such protocols shall be negotiated, determined and agreed upon by both parties hereto.

  • Research Use Reporting To assure adherence to NIH GDS Policy, the PI agrees to provide annual Progress Updates as part of the annual Project Renewal or Project Close-out processes, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year data access period. The PI who is seeking Renewal or Close-out of a project agree to complete the appropriate online forms and provide specific information such as how the data have been used, including publications or presentations that resulted from the use of the requested dataset(s), a summary of any plans for future research use (if the PI is seeking renewal), any violations of the terms of access described within this Agreement and the implemented remediation, and information on any downstream intellectual property generated from the data. The PI also may include general comments regarding suggestions for improving the data access process in general. Information provided in the progress updates helps NIH evaluate program activities and may be considered by the NIH GDS governance committees as part of NIH’s effort to provide ongoing stewardship of data sharing activities subject to the NIH GDS Policy.

  • Clinical Studies The animal and other preclinical studies and clinical trials conducted by the Company or on behalf of the Company were, and, if still pending are, to the Company’s knowledge, being conducted in all material respects in compliance with all Applicable Laws and in accordance with experimental protocols, procedures and controls generally used by qualified experts in the preclinical study and clinical trials of new drugs and biologics as applied to comparable products to those being developed by the Company; the descriptions of the results of such preclinical studies and clinical trials contained in the Registration Statement and the Prospectus are accurate and complete in all material respects, and, except as set forth in the Registration Statement and the Prospectus, the Company has no knowledge of any other clinical trials or preclinical studies, the results of which reasonably call into question the clinical trial or preclinical study results described or referred to in the Registration Statement and the Prospectus when viewed in the context in which such results are described; and the Company has not received any written notices or correspondence from the FDA, the EMA, or any other domestic or foreign governmental agency requiring the termination, suspension or modification of any preclinical studies or clinical trials conducted by or on behalf of the Company that are described in the Registration Statement and the Prospectus or the results of which are referred to in the Registration Statement and the Prospectus.

  • Research Plan The Parties recognize that the Research Plan describes the collaborative research and development activities they will undertake and that interim research goals set forth in the Research Plan are good faith guidelines. Should events occur that require modification of these goals, then by mutual agreement the Parties can modify them through an amendment, according to Paragraph 13.6.