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

Sara R. Biyabani

dblp:45/5856 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1988
—ORCID · none

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

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author

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
Embedded and real-time systems · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Embedded and real-time systems
distributed real-time systems
0.011988
The Integration of Deadline and Criticalness in Hard Real-Time Scheduling · RTSS 1988
Embedded and real-time systems › real-time scheduling
heuristic scheduling
0.011988
The Integration of Deadline and Criticalness in Hard Real-Time Scheduling · RTSS 1988
Embedded and real-time systems
real-time scheduling
0.011988
The Integration of Deadline and Criticalness in Hard Real-Time Scheduling · RTSS 1988

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

simulation · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1988 The Integration of Deadline and Criticalness in Hard Real-Time Scheduling
abstract
Two task-scheduling algorithms for distributed hard real-time computer systems are presented. Both algorithms are based on a heuristic approach and explicitly account for both the deadlines and criticality of tasks when making scheduling decisions. In analyzing the algorithms, a performance metric called the weighted guarantee ratio is defined. It reflects both the percentage of tasks that make their deadlines and their relative worth to the system. The performance is analyzed by simulating the behavior of the algorithms as well as that of several other pertinent baseline algorithms under a wide range of system conditions including a nonhomogeneous task arrival rate. The results show that the algorithms outperform all the baseline algorithms except for the ideal but impractical centralized baseline and in many cases perform close to the ideal.>
Sara R. Biyabani, John A. Stankovic, Krithi Ramamritham
RTSS1