Proactive fault detection in computer networks

Alekseev, Dmytro; Sayenko, Vladimir

doi:10.1109/infocommst.2014.6992309

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…health IT vendors, healthcare organizations, and clinicians). While this lays groundwork for future efforts, researchers would need to work closely with computer scientists, 52 health IT vendors, 53 and healthcare organizations 49 to develop additional scientific knowledge, methods, and tools to advance real-time measurement, make surveillance more automated, 54 and initiate safety improvement efforts.…”

Section: Monitoring Evaluation and Optimization Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current challenges in health information technology–related patient safety

Sittig

Wright

Coiera³

et al. 2018

Health Informatics J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We identify and describe nine key, short-term, challenges to help healthcare organizations, health information technology developers, researchers, policymakers, and funders focus their efforts on health information technology–related patient safety. Categorized according to the stage of the health information technology lifecycle where they appear, these challenges relate to (1) developing models, methods, and tools to enable risk assessment; (2) developing standard user interface design features and functions; (3) ensuring the safety of software in an interfaced, network-enabled clinical environment; (4) implementing a method for unambiguous patient identification (1–4 Design and Development stage); (5) developing and implementing decision support which improves safety; (6) identifying practices to safely manage information technology system transitions (5 and 6 Implementation and Use stage); (7) developing real-time methods to enable automated surveillance and monitoring of system performance and safety; (8) establishing the cultural and legal framework/safe harbor to allow sharing information about hazards and adverse events; and (9) developing models and methods for consumers/patients to improve health information technology safety (7–9 Monitoring, Evaluation, and Optimization stage). These challenges represent key “to-do’s” that must be completed before we can expect to have safe, reliable, and efficient health information technology–based systems required to care for patients.

show abstract

Section: Monitoring Evaluation and Optimization Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current challenges in health information technology–related patient safety

Sittig

Wright

Coiera³

et al. 2018

Health Informatics J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another common element of network fault localization is the use of probabilistic approaches (such as conditional probabilities and Bayes networks) [17,19,34,35], among others, as well as machine learning [20,21,24]. These can be probably adapted to software.…”

Section: Networkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdisciplinary Survey of Fault Localization Techniques to Aid Software Engineering

Beszedes

2019

APH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fault localization (narrowing down the cause of a failure to a small number of suspicious components of the system) is an important concern in many different engineering fields and there have been a large number of algorithmic solutions proposed to aid this activity. In this work, we performed a systematic analysis of related literature, not limiting the search to any specific engineering field, with the aim to find solutions in nonsoftware areas that could be successfully adapted to software fault localization. We found out that few areas have significant literature, in this topic, that are good candidates for adaptation (computer networks, for instance), and that although some classes of methods are less suitable, there are useful ideas in almost all fields that could potentially be reused for software fault localization.

show abstract

“…The main representative literature we identified in the networking category are: (Steinder and Sethi, 2004c), (Alekseev and Sayenko, 2014), (Yu et al, 2010), (Brodie et al, 2002), (Brodie et al, 2003), (Chao et al, 1999), (Chen et al, 2004), (Cheng et al, 2010), (Deng et al, 1993), (Fecko and Steinder, 2001), (Lu et al, 2013a), (Hood and Ji, 1997), (Kant et al, 2002), (Kant et al, 2004), (Katzela and Schwartz, 1995), (Kompella et al, 2005), (Lu et al, 2013b), (Mohamed, 2017), (Natu and Sethi, 2005), (Natu and Sethi, 2006), (Natu and Sethi, 2007a), (Natu and Sethi, 2007b), (Rish et al, 2004), (Tang et al, 2005), (Traczyk, 2004), (Wang et al, 2012), (Zhang et al, 2011), (Boubour et al, 1997), (Aghasaryan et al, 1997), (Aghasaryan et al, 1998), (Steinder and Sethi, 2004a), (Steinder and Sethi, 2004b), (Ben-Haim, 1980).…”

Section: Networkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Fault Localization Techniques from Other Disciplines for Software Engineering

Beszedes

2019

Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Software Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proactive fault detection in computer networks

Cited by 3 publications

References 2 publications

Current challenges in health information technology–related patient safety

Current challenges in health information technology–related patient safety

Interdisciplinary Survey of Fault Localization Techniques to Aid Software Engineering

Investigating Fault Localization Techniques from Other Disciplines for Software Engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About