2020 International Conference on Rebooting Computing (ICRC) 2020
DOI: 10.1109/icrc2020.2020.00006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Why Reliability for Computing Needs Rethinking

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The first argument follows on the steps used by Moore and Shannon for hammocks: a square MMN is one which is neither too serial (which depends on l) but also not too parallel either (which depends on w), so obviously the most natural choice for achieving a balance is w=l. Another argument is given in [5,16], where several FOMs have been proposed: the steepness of the reliability polynomials, and their variation in a symmetric interval with respect to p0=0.5. The simulations reported there, as well as fresh simulations [6], have shown that square MMNs are able to come “closer” to θ(p0.5) than nonsquare ones. Still, such simulations have covered only small values of l and w. Finally, suppose that one would randomly choose from the set of all MMNs of size n.…”
Section: Most Reliable Mmnsmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The first argument follows on the steps used by Moore and Shannon for hammocks: a square MMN is one which is neither too serial (which depends on l) but also not too parallel either (which depends on w), so obviously the most natural choice for achieving a balance is w=l. Another argument is given in [5,16], where several FOMs have been proposed: the steepness of the reliability polynomials, and their variation in a symmetric interval with respect to p0=0.5. The simulations reported there, as well as fresh simulations [6], have shown that square MMNs are able to come “closer” to θ(p0.5) than nonsquare ones. Still, such simulations have covered only small values of l and w. Finally, suppose that one would randomly choose from the set of all MMNs of size n.…”
Section: Most Reliable Mmnsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Firstly, the reliability polynomials are efficiently computable (for compositions of series and parallel). Secondly, there are series and parallel compositions which are comparable to hammocks (with respect to several different metrics for reliability) [6]. Thirdly, the reliability polynomials of compositions have compact forms and are sparser than the ones for hammocks [16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…. , 9: L (x) = 4.4602 − 0.11725x−0.0096x 2 +0.02393x 3 − −0.00847x 4 +0.00083x 5 −0.00003x 6 The smooth curve defined by r(x) = (x, L(x), P (x, L(x))), x ∈ [1,9], belongs to Pascal's surface and is interconnecting the points (x i , y i , N i ), i = 3, 4, . .…”
Section: Reliability Polynomialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is in this context that we have started to revisit results on network reliability [54,55], by looking into consecutive [5,23] and hammock networks [22]. That is how we slowly realized that the original goal of Moore and Shannon-of finding networks for enhancing the reliability of computations-has been slowly shifting over time towards networks for reliable communications [6]. Still, with scaling, both computations and communications are being affected by variations [8], so a deeper understanding of reliability polynomials should in the end prove beneficial, and Pascal's surface seems to be providing a different view which starts from their coefficients.…”
Section: Introduction and Motivationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lately, the relentless scaling of CMOS transistors [7] has been the driving force calling for reliability enhancements of complex digital systems affected by noises and variations [8,9]. These have inspired us to investigate consecutive systems [10,11] and, more recently, hammocks [12], as well as other particular two-terminal networks [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%