Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Rhys S. Francis

dblp:36/2802 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
5as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-8903-704XORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 5 · 5 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Parallel and multicore computing · 93% Performance modeling and evaluation · 7%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel algorithms
parallel algorithm design
0.011988
A Benchmark Parallel Sort for Shared Memory Multiprocessors · IEEE Trans. Computers 1988
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel algorithms › sorting
parallel merge sort
0.011988
A Benchmark Parallel Sort for Shared Memory Multiprocessors · IEEE Trans. Computers 1988
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel algorithms › sorting
parallel sorting
0.011988
A Benchmark Parallel Sort for Shared Memory Multiprocessors · IEEE Trans. Computers 1988
Parallel and multicore computing › multiprocessor system
shared-memory multiprocessor
0.011988
A Benchmark Parallel Sort for Shared Memory Multiprocessors · IEEE Trans. Computers 1988

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

benchmarking · 0.0asymptotic complexity analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Why We Need a Reference Architecture for Research Data
abstract
There is little doubt that we have entered an era where data underpins modern science and research in general. In support of this, numerous infrastructures have been designed and built, ranging from proprietary on-prem systems through to distributed commercial clouds. Such implementations provide a range of functions during the research lifecycle from provisioning and cataloguing data assets through to storing and presenting data to computing platforms. In this paper we analyse the underlying principles of such systems and develop a high-level Research Data Reference Architecture (RDRA). Specifically, we identify eight key features of a RDRA that can guide the design, construction, and procurement of implementations without mandating any domain, approach, technical solution, or product choice. As a result, it allows implementers to make local and commercial decisions while still meeting the core requirements of a research data management platform. The intended audience is teams charged with implementing infrastructure in research organizations.
David Abramson 0001, Luc Betbeder-Matibet, Stephen Bird, Jake Carroll, Rhys S. Francis, Wojtek Goscinski, Ai-Lin Soo, Garry Swan, Carmel Walsh, Glenn R. Wightwick, J. Max Wilkinson
e-Science5
1994 A Data Parallel Scientific Modelling Language
Rhys S. Francis, Ian D. Mathieson, Paul G. Whiting, Martin R. Dix, Harvey L. Davies, Leon D. Rotstayn
J. Parallel Distributed Comput.1
1992 A parallel partition for enhanced parallel QuickSort
Rhys S. Francis, L. J. H. Pannan
Parallel Comput.1
1988 Synchronised execution on shared memory multiprocessors
Rhys S. Francis, Ian D. Mathieson
Parallel Comput.1
1988 A Benchmark Parallel Sort for Shared Memory Multiprocessors
abstract
The first parallel sort algorithm for shared memory MIMD (multiple-instruction-multiple-data-stream) multiprocessors that has a theoretical and measured speedup near linear is exhibited. It is based on a novel asynchronous parallel merge that evenly partitions data to be merged among any number of processors. A benchmark sorting algorithm is proposed that uses this merge to remove the linear time bottleneck inherent in previous multiprocessors sorts. This sort, when applied to data set on p processors, has a time complexity of O((n log n)/p)+O((n log p)/p) and a space complexity of 2n, where n is the number of keys being sorted. Evaluations of the merge and benchmark sort algorithms on a 12-processor Sequent Balance 21000 System demonstrate near-linear speedup when compared to sequential Quicksort.>
Rhys S. Francis, Ian D. Mathieson
IEEE Trans. Computers1
1987 An Evaluation of Parallel Procedure Calls
Rhys S. Francis, Ian D. Mathieson
ICPP1