| J. Misra, Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation, Computing Surveys, vol.18, no.1, pp.39-65, Mar 1986 |
....receiving time stamped messages over several sequential channels; i.e. on each channel the messages arrive in time stamp order. The aggregate message stream arriving at the process is, however, not in time stamp order. The purpose of the synchronization mechanism (optimistic [3] 2] conservative [7], or variations of these) is to produce a message stream that is in time stamp order, for further processing by the event processor. Obviously, the complication in the sequencing procedure arises when a channel is empty, for then the sequencer does not know what to do with the messages in the ....
Misra, J., "Distributed discrete event simulation", ACM Comput. Surv. 18, 1 (March 1986), 39-65.
....simulation paradigms. 2 Multi Agent Based Simulation MABS should not be seen as a completely new and original simulation paradigm. As we will see in this section, it is influenced by and partially builds upon some existing paradigms, such as, parallel and distributed discrete event simulation [16], object oriented simulation [23] as well as dynamic micro simulation [11,9] 2.1 MABS vs. Object Oriented Simulation Since there is no commonly agreed definition of the term agent , it is difficult to precisely define what constitutes MABS and how it should be contrasted to Object Oriented ....
Misra J.: Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation. ACM Computing Surveys, 18(1) (1986) 39-65
....[5] When considering a computation, the logical time notion is relevant to the computation itself: produced by the computation, it is internal to it. Differently, some computations are driven by a time notion external to them. As an example, let us consider the distributed simulation case [4, 7, 12]. The simulation program issues events to be executed at some predefined time. The time notion is here the so called simulation time (also called virtual time) The main job of the underlying simulation system is to execute the simulation program providing it with a consistent implementation of ....
....model (Section 2.2) state that the realtime interval in which an event is executed is always finite, i.e. LKNMPO =GFH RQ I =GFH TS M 5U . The clocks satisfy the following properties: Virtual Time Consistency (VC) Let and be two events such that causally precedes [8, 12]. Formally: VXW B J Y BC J ZV . This means that approximate time satisfies the properties of virtual time and it is monotonic) Scheduling Consistency (SC) 5KNBC J DE ] GFH . The approximate time provides the application with an idealized ....
Misra J., Distributed Discrete Event Simulation. ACM Computing Surveys, 18(1):39-65, 1986.
....actors can occur only when constraints on the relative local time information of the actors are adhered to. The DDE domain is based on distributed discrete event processing and leverages a wealth of research devoted to this topic. Some tutorial publications on this topic are [ 19] 27] 43] [70]. The DDE domain implements a specific variant of distributed discrete event systems (DDES) as expounded by Chandy and Misra [19] The domain serves as a framework for studying DDES with two special emphases. First we consider DDES from a dataflow perspective; we view DDE as an implementation of ....
....on page 21 2 for further details about this actor. 21.3. 3 Alternative Distributed Discrete Event Methods The field of distributed discrete event simulation, also referred to as parallel discrete event simulation (PDES) has been an active area of research since the late 1970 s [19] 27] 43][70] [79] Recently there has been a resurgence of activity [5] 6] 11] This is due in part to the wide availability of distributed frameworks for hosting simulations and the application of parallel simulation techniques to nonresearch oriented domains. For example, several WWW search engines are ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
J. Misra, "Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation," Computing Surveys, vol. 18, no. 1, March 1986, pp. 39-65.
.... from ALU8: Here is the sample code for the ALU object : class ALU8 public: Methods that simulates the behavior of the object void add( void subtract( void exception( void executeProcess( class UserState : public BasicState input and output port of the object InSignal int x[8], y[8] opcode[2] opcode denotes the operation OutSignal int z[8] The method executeProcess( simulates the behavior of the object. This is the main part of the modeling and the modeler just needs to plug the behavior of the object into the class definition, by conforming the names that ....
.... ALU8: Here is the sample code for the ALU object : class ALU8 public: Methods that simulates the behavior of the object void add( void subtract( void exception( void executeProcess( class UserState : public BasicState input and output port of the object InSignal int x[8] y[8], opcode[2] opcode denotes the operation OutSignal int z[8] The method executeProcess( simulates the behavior of the object. This is the main part of the modeling and the modeler just needs to plug the behavior of the object into the class definition, by conforming the names that are ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
J. Misra, 1995, Distributed discrete-event simulation, Computing Surveys, 18(1).
....to what is the best tradeoff among blocking and optimistically progressing with respect to the parallelism inherent to the simulation model. 1 Introduction Asynchronous, distributed simulation of time dynamical systems has historically progressed along two different front lines: the conservative [1] and the optimistic [2] approach. A variety of amendments to these schemes is at hand today [3] aiming to improve the performance of implementations by exploiting domain This work was conducted while Alois Ferscha was visiting the Dipartimento di Informatica, Universit a di Torino during ....
....(end of step S1 ) After that the algorithm is entering a loop, where first SE looks at all IBs for new packet arrivals. A packet (see Figure 6 (a) carries two different kinds of information: 1) information that is Input Output . IB [I] P P P CH [I] tt IB [1] P P P OB [1] P P OB [O] P P EVL IQ # # # # # # # # RQ OQ # # # # # # SS S S S S S S S S EVL EVL EVL EVL EVL S S S LVT Pointer GVT Pointer LVT LVTW GVT Channels Channels S S S S Figure 5: Logical ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Jayadev Misra. Distributed discrete-event simulation. ACM Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
....on the synchronization of logical simulation processes executing in parallel on different processing nodes in a parallel or distributed environment. Asynchronous, distributed simulation of time dynamical systems has historically progressed along two different front lines: the conservative [Misr 86] and the optimistic [Jeff 85a] approach. A variety of amendments to these schemes is at hand today [Fuji 90a] Fers 95] aiming to improve the performance of implementations by exploiting domain intrinsics of the simulated (physical) system. Common to all simulation strategies with distribution ....
....execution. Jefferson [Jeff 85a] recognized this problem to be the inverse of Lamport s logical clock problem [Lamp 78] i.e. providing clock values for events occurring in a distributed system such that all events appear ordered in logical time. It is intuitively convincing and has been shown in [Misr 86] that no causality error can ever occur in an asynchronous LP simulation if and only if every LP adheres to processing events in nondecreasing time stamp order only (local causality constraint (lcc) as formulated in [Fuji 90a] Although sufficient, it is not always necessary to obey the lcc, ....
J. Misra. "Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation". ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 39--65, March 1986.
....distributed execution. Jefferson [44] recognized this problem to be the inverse of Lamport s logical clock problem [45] i.e. providing clock values for events occuring in a distributed system such that all events appear ordered in logical time. It is intuitively convincing and has been shown in [52] that no causality error can ever occur in an asynchronous LP simulation if and only if every LP adheres to processing events in nondecreasing timestamp order only (local causality constraint (lcc) as formulated in [35] Although sufficient, it is not always necessary to obey the lcc, because two ....
....communication interfaces in more detail. 4.4 Chandy Misra Bryant Communication Interfaces LP simulations following a conservative strategy date back to original works by Chandy and Misra [15] and Bryant [13] and are often referred to as the Chandy Misra Bryant (CMB) protocols. As described by [52], in CMB causality of events across LPs is preserved by sending timestamped (external) event messages of type hee ti, where ee denotes the event and t is a copy of LVT of the sending LP at ( the instant when the message was created and sent. t = ts(ee) is also called the timestamp of the event. ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
J. Misra. Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation. ACM Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, 1986.
....When an event is ready to be realized (that is cause a state change in the simulation) the world is rst stepped forward to the appropriate time. However, all the reasoning about distributed messages and timing is done in the discrete event framework. MPADES is a conservative simulator (such as [1]) events are not realized until it can be guaranteed that casual event ordering will not be violated. Optimistic simulations [2] on the other hand, support a back up mechanism in case events are executed out of order. Debates over the merits of conservative and optimistic simulation are common ....
Misra, J.: Distributed discrete-event simulation. ACM Computing Surveys 18 (1986) 39-65
....several different simulation synchronization methods. In particular, Yaddes supports sequential simulation using an event list and three distributed simulation synchronization methods distributed simulation using multiple event lists; conservative (Chandy Misra Bryant) distributed simulation[7]; and, optimistic (virtual time based) distributed simulation[8] The programming model used in the Yaddes system is derived from Chandy Misra Bryant distributed discrete event simulation. The realworld system is modeled by a collection of physical processes (PPs) that periodically exchange ....
Misra, J., "Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation," ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 39-66, March 1986.
....(NSERC) of Canada. In parallel discrete event simulation, interacting physical processes are represented in the simulation by concurrent communicating logical processes (LPs) Each LP has its own notion of simulation time (local virtual time or LVT) and the LPs exchange timestamped messages[9]. In all cases in this paper, timestamp refers to the receive time of a message. Optimistic synchronization allows each LP to execute asynchronously. However, to ensure correct simulation results, certain causality constraints must be met. Specifically, each LP must process received messages in ....
Misra, J., "Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation," ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 18, No. 1, March 1986. pp. 39-66,
....at the predetermined value; and (2) Every simulation step is designed to be completed within one ticking interval. The DTS approach has major advantages over other distributed simulation approaches, even if we assume that the latter approaches can be adapted somehow to enable RT simulation [Fuj90, Mis86]. This is because synchronization of simulation steps executed by distributed simulator objects under the DTS scheme does not require message exchanges among the host nodes (not counting the message exchanges which may be needed at a certain low frequency for resynchronizing the RT clocks of ....
Misra, J., "Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation", ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 18, No. 1, March 1986, pp.39-65.
No context found.
J. Misra, Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation, Computing Surveys, vol.18, no.1, pp.39-65, Mar 1986
No context found.
J. Misra, Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation, ACM Comp. Surv., 18, 1(1986)
No context found.
J. Misra. "Distributed discrete-event simulation". Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra. "Distributed discrete-event simulation". Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra. \Distributed discrete-event simulation". Computing Surveys, 18(1):39-65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra. Distributed discrete-event simulation. Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra. "Distributed discrete-event simulation". Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra. "Distributed discrete-event simulation". Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra. "Distributed discrete-event simulation". Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra. Distributed-discrete event simulation. ACM Computing Surveys, 18(1):39--65, March 1986.
No context found.
J. Misra, "Distributed Discrete-Event Simulation," Computing Surveys, vol. 18, no. 1, March 1986, pp. 39-65.
No context found.
J. Misra, `Distributed discrete-event simulation', Computing Surveys, 18, (l), 39--65 (1986).
No context found.
J. Misra. Distributed discrete event simulation. In Computing Surveys, volume 18, March 1986.
First 50 documents Next 50
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC