4.6 Article

A Comparison Fault Diagnosis Algorithm for Star Networks

期刊

IEEE ACCESS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 94214-94223

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3093335

关键词

Fault diagnosis; star network; Hamiltonian cycle; the comparison model; multiprocessor system

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [61862003, 61761006]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region of China [2018GXNSFDA281052]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper proposes a precise fault diagnosis algorithm for a star network system, consisting of three main parts. The theoretical analysis and simulation results demonstrate the accuracy and time complexity of the algorithm.
Fault diagnosis for a multiprocessor system is a process of identifying the faulty nodes in the system and is an important issue on the reliability of the system. As to the problem that there are few effective algorithms to diagnose faulty nodes in a given star network system in the literature, this paper proposes a precise fault diagnosis algorithm to identify faulty nodes in a star network system with a given syndrome under the comparison model. Such an algorithm contains three main parts. In the first part, we present an algorithm called Partition-Cycle for partitioning a cycle into sequences based on a given syndrome of the cycle. In the second part, we introduce an algorithm called Digout to diagnose these cycle sequences obtained the first part, which can diagnose each node in the cycle to be faulty or fault-free or unknown. In the third part, we design a diagnosis algorithm called Star-Digout to diagnose faulty nodes in an n-dimensional (n >= 6) star networks, which is proved to contain a cycle that contains all nodes in the network and is not the same two nodes. Our theoretical analysis shows the time complexity of the diagnosis algorithm isO(n!). Our simulation results show that our algorithm is a precise diagnosis algorithm for a star network system.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据