A (4<i>n</i> − 9)/3 diagnosis algorithm for generalised cube networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of the t/k-diagnosis is to isolate all faulty processors (nodes) in a multiprocessor system to within a set of nodes in which at most k nodes are correct, provided the number of faulty nodes does not exceed t. As compared to the classical precise diagnosis strategy, the t/k-diagnosis strategy can significantly improve the self-diagnosing capability of multiprocessor system. The generalised cube network (GCN), or equivalently the BC graphs, is a regular topology, which provides a unified view of the hypercube and some of its variants. This paper addressed the t/k-diagnosis of GCNs. By exploring the relationship between the size of a largest connected component of the 0-test subgraph of a faulty GCN and the distribution of the faulty nodes over the network, an time (4n − 9)/3 diagnosis algorithm on an n-dimensional GCN is presented, where N = 2 n is the total number of the nodes of the network being diagnosed. To our knowledge, this is the first time to give a t/k-diagnosis algorithm for GCNs and .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".