2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.dam.2008.05.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Short correctness proofs for two self-stabilizing algorithms under the distributed daemon model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are some scheduler models depending on the number of concurrently operating processes and granularity of an atomic action. In this article, we consider the distributed daemon, 9,10 which assumes the followings:…”
Section: Schedulementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There are some scheduler models depending on the number of concurrently operating processes and granularity of an atomic action. In this article, we consider the distributed daemon, 9,10 which assumes the followings:…”
Section: Schedulementioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are some scheduler models depending on the number of concurrently operating processes and granularity of an atomic action. In this article, we consider the distributed daemon, 9,10 which assumes the followings: The number of the process : | S i |≥1 for any i (≥0). An atomic action : read data from all adjacent registers, update its internal state, and write data to all adjacent registers. …”
Section: Preliminaries: Model and Definitionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are some scheduler models depending on the number of concurrently operating processes and granularity of an atomic action. In this paper, we consider the distributed daemon [4,10] which assumes the followings:…”
Section: Definition 4 (Fair Schedule) If Every Process P I ∈ P Appeamentioning
confidence: 99%