File fragment classification is an important step in the task of file carving in digital forensics. In file carving, files must be reconstructed based on their content as a result of their fragmented storage on disk or in memory. Existing methods for classification of file fragments typically use hand-engineered features, such as byte histograms or entropy measures. In this paper, we propose an approach using sparse coding that enables automated feature extraction. Sparse coding, or sparse dictionary learning, is an unsupervised learning algorithm, and is capable of extracting features based simply on how well those features can be used to reconstruct the original data. With respect to file fragments, we learn sparse dictionaries for n-grams, continuous sequences of bytes, of different sizes. These dictionaries may then be used to estimate n-gram frequencies for a given file fragment, but for significantly larger n-gram sizes than are typically found in existing methods which suffer from combinatorial explosion. To demonstrate the capability of our sparse coding approach, we used the resulting features to train standard classifiers, such as support vector machines over multiple file types. Experimentally, we achieved significantly better classification results with respect to existing methods, especially when the features were used in supplement to existing hand-engineered features.

Parallel machines are becoming more complex with increasing core counts and more heterogeneous architectures. However, the commonly used parallel programming models, C/C++ with MPI and/or OpenMP, make it difficult to write source code that is easily tuned for many targets. Newer language approaches attempt to ease this burden by providing optimization features such as automatic load balancing, overlap of computation and communication, message-driven execution, and implicit data layout optimizations. In this paper, we compare several implementations of LULESH, a proxy application for shock hydrodynamics, to determine strengths and weaknesses of different programming models for parallel computation. We focus on four traditional (OpenMP, MPI, MPI+OpenMP, CUDA) and four emerging (Chapel, Charm++, Liszt, Loci) programming models. In evaluating these models, we focus on programmer productivity, performance and ease of applying optimizations.