In the era of explosive information, storage subsystem is becoming more and more important in our daily life and commercial markets. Because more and more data are recorded in the digital form and stored in the storage device, an intelligent mechanism is required to make the management of the digital data and storage devices more eficiently rather than simply keep increasing more storage equipment into a system. The concept of storage virtualization was introduced to solve this problem, by aggregating all the physical devices into a single virtual storage device and hidding the complexity of underlying block devices. Through this virtual layer, users can dynamically allocate and resize their virtual storage device to satisfy their need, and they can also use the methods provided by the virtual layer to organize data more efficiently. Linux Logical Volume Manager 2 (LVM2) is an implementation of storage virtualization on the Linux operation system. It includes three components: the kernel-space devicemapper, the user-space device-mapper support library (libdevmapper), and the user-space LVM2 toolset. This thesis will focus on the kernel-space device-mapper, which provides virtualization mechanism for user-space logical volume manager. The organization of this thesis is composed of : (1) Introduce novel technologies in the recent years, (2) Provide an advanced document about the internals of device-mapper, (3) Try optimizing the mapping table algorithm, and (4) Evaluate the performance of device-mapper.

With the increasing stress on teachers and students to meet and raise mathematics standards in schools, especially in the secondary level, the need for strong curricula and supporting materials for teachers has grown. A good curriculum, however, must do more than align with state standards and teach to the state exams; it must encourage students to enjoy mathematics. In an effort to help ease the plague of math anxiety, this thesis presents an eighth grade curriculum, called MathTAKStic, not only directly aligning with the Texas state standards, the Texas Essential Knowledge Skills (TEKS), but also encouraging students to pursue higher level thinking through active learning and logical thinking. To test the curriculum and find out its usefulness, several lessons were taught at a middle school. Although the scores of those learning with the curriculum were not always better than others, MathTAKStic led to a greater increase in students’ performance compared to those who were not exposed to the lessons, an increased interest in math and a plethora of ideas for the future. These results were concluded based on a comparison of students’ scores from the previous year to the current year on the Texas standardized test. Overall, the increase in passing scores of MathTAKStic students preceded other classes in the same school.

Thèse : ? : Indiana University : 1989. / Bibliogr. p. [143]-147.

Thesis (doctoral)--Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 131-146).

The core pluralist thesis about logic, broadly construed, is the claim that two or more logics are correct. In this thesis I discuss a uniquely interesting variant of logical pluralism that I call logical contextualism. Roughly, the logical contextualists’ thought is that, for fixed values p and q, the statement “p entails q” and its cognates such as “q is a logical consequence of p” or “the argument from p to q is logically valid,” are true in some contexts and false in others. After developing a contextualist account of logical pluralism I proceed to examine implications that, if true, logical contextualism would have on discussions about reasonable disagreement among epistemic peers and on discussions about the aim and purpose of argumentation. I show that logical contextualism allows for the possibility of logically-based reasonable disagreements among epistemic peers. In the face of such disagreements there is no obligation to revise one’s belief, nor is there any obligation to degrade the peer status of the agent with whom one stands in disagreement. The possibility of logically-based reasonable disagreements, it will be argued, suggests a reconceptualization of the aims and purpose of argumentation. Most accounts of the purpose of argumentation hold that argumentation’s primary purpose is to achieve rational agreement on a contested issue. Such an agreement is thought to require that at least one of the parties in the argumentation change their beliefs or commitments. However, the existence of logically-based reasonable disagreements, I argue, implies that there are some argumentations that ought not to resolve with agreement. Therefore, rather than understanding argumentation as purely an effort to convince an opponent, or as a means to reach consensus, I claim that argumentation ought to be understood as an effort to gain a better understanding of divergent and perhaps irreconcilable perspectives.

This research develops an equipment failure prognostics model to predict the equipment’s chance of survival, using LAD. LAD benefits from not relying on any statistical theory, which enables it to overcome the problems concerning the statistical properties of the datasets. Its main advantage is its straightforward process and self-explanatory results. Herein, our main objective is to develop models to calculate equipment’s survival probability at a certain future moment, using LAD. We employ the LAD’s pattern generation procedure. Then, we introduce a guideline to employ generated patterns to estimate the equipment’s survival probability. The models are applied on a condition monitoring dataset. Performance analysis reveals that they provide comprehensible results that are greatly beneficial to maintenance practitioners. Results are compared with PHM’s results. The comparison reveals that the LAD models compare favorably to the PHM. Since they are at their beginning phase, some future directions are presented to improve their performances.

Husserl’s Logical Investigations contain an apparent discrepancy in their account of meaning. They first present meanings, contra psychologism, as commonly available, reiterable, invariant, possibly valid, and independent of our “acts of meaning”. They then present meaning, almost psychologistically, as a kind of intentional experience on which all truths and other transcendent meanings depend. I offer a critical developmental study of this problem within Husserl’s semantics. I argue (1) that Husserl had reason to adopt his dyadic account of signification, (2) that this “two-sided” account shaped, and was reciprocally informed by, the two-step phenomenological method, and (3) that Husserl’s proposed resolution to the strain within his semantics, while driven by legitimate motivations, is precarious. I begin with the Logical Investigations and their context. I represent their two sets of semantic claims, recalling how the discord between claims of those sets would have been especially conspicuous when the Investigations were published, amid much debate over psychologism, in 1900-01. I then show why Husserl embraced two discordant views of meaning. I survey the 19th century sources for these views, confirming Jocelyn Benoist’s genealogical thesis that Husserl’s semantics took its psychological and logical sides primarily from Franz Brentano and Bernard Bolzano, respectively. And I present the Bolzanian arguments and Brentanian descriptions that served as grounds for Husserl’s semantics, showing how these pieces of reasoning were appropriated, and weighing their strength. Next, I trace how Husserl’s two-sided theory of meaning, and its apparent incoherence, both inspired and determined the transcendental and eidetic reductions. I then examine how Husserl subsequently used the phenomenological method to reinforce, to integrate, and to revise his theory of meaning. And I address a methodological criticism that this circular development prompts. Finally, I assess Husserl’s attempt to explain the division within the phenomenon of meaning by reference to what he called “transcendental subjectivity”. I consider two contrary objections to this explanation. I indicate how Husserl’s explanation is responsive to the insight behind each objection, but contend that it is perhaps not adequately responsive to the insight behind either.

The logical framework LF and its metalogic Twelf can be used to encode and reason about a wide variety of logics, languages, and other deductive systems in a formal, machine-checkable way. Recent studies have shown that ML-like languages can profitably be extended with a notion of subtyping called refinement types. A refinement type discipline uses an extra layer of term classification above the usual type system to more accurately capture certain properties of terms. I propose that adding refinement types to LF is both useful and practical. To support the claim, I exhibit an extension of LF with refinement types called LFR,work out important details of itsmetatheory, delineate a practical algorithmfor refinement type reconstruction, andpresent several case studies that highlight the utility of refinement types for formalized mathematics. In the end I find that refinement types and LF are a match made in heaven: refinements enable many rich new modes of expression, and the simplicity of LF ensures that they come at a modest cost.

A logical framework and its implementation should serve as a flexible tool for specifying, simulating, and reasoning about formal systems. When the formal systems we are interested in exhibit state and concurrency, however, existing logical frameworks fall short of this goal. Logical frameworks based on a rewriting interpretation of substructural logics, ordered and linear logic in particular, can help. To this end, this dissertation introduces and demonstrates four methodologies for developing and using substructural logical frameworks for specifying and reasoning about stateful and concurrent systems. Structural focalization is a synthesis of ideas from Andreoli’s focused sequent calculi and Watkins’s hereditary substitution. We can use structural focalization to take a logic and define a restricted form of derivations, the focused derivations, that form the basis of a logical framework. We apply this methodology to define SLS, a logical framework for substructural logical specifications, as a fragment of ordered linear lax logic. Logical correspondence is a methodology for relating and inter-deriving different styles of programming language specification in SLS. The styles we connect range from very high-level specification styles like natural semantics, which do not fully specify the control structure of programs, to low-level specification styles like destination-passing, which provide detailed control over concurrency and control flow. We apply this methodology to systematically synthesize a low-level destination-passing semantics for a Mini-ML language extended with stateful and concurrent primitives. The specification is mostly high-level except for the relatively few rules that actually deal with concurrency. Linear logical approximation is a methodology for deriving program analyses by performing abstract analysis on the SLS encoding of the language’s operational semantics. We demonstrate this methodology by deriving a control flow analysis and an alias analysis from suitable programming language specifications. Generative invariants are a powerful generalization of both context-free grammars and LF’s regular worlds that allow us to express invariants of SLS specifications in SLS.We show that generative invariants can form the basis of progress-andpreservation- style reasoning about programming languages encoded in SLS.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1997. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 391-403). Also available on the Internet.