DOCSLIB.ORG

University of Groningen 16Th SC@RUG 2019 Proceedings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
University of Groningen 16Th SC@RUG 2019 Proceedings University of Groningen 16th SC@RUG 2019 proceedings 2018-2019 Smedinga, Reinder; Biehl, Michael IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Publication date: 2019 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Smedinga, R., & Biehl, M. (Eds.) (2019). 16th SC@RUG 2019 proceedings 2018-2019. Bibliotheek der R.U. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 13-11-2019 faculty of science computing science faculty of science computing science and engineering and engineering 1 6 th SC @ RUG 201 SC@RUG 2019 proceedings 8 -201 9 16th SC@RUG 2018-2019 Rein Smedinga, Michael Biehl (editors) rug.nl/research/bernoulli R20170190_omslag_SC_RUG2018_.indd 3 01-05-18 13:11 SC@RUG 2019 proceedings Rein Smedinga Michael Biehl editors 2019 Groningen ISBN (e-pub): 978-94-034-1664-9 ISBN (book): 978-94-034-1665-6 Publisher: Bibliotheek der R.U. Title: 16th SC@RUG proceedings 2018-2019 Computing Science, University of Groningen NUR-code: 980 SC@RUG 2019 proceedings About SC@RUG 2019 Introduction line supported with cleverly designed graphics. Lectures on SC@RUG (or student colloquium in full) is a course how to write a paper and on scientific integrity were given that master students in computing science follow in the first by Michael Biehl and a workshop on reviewing was offered year of their master study at the University of Groningen. by Femke. SC@RUG was organized as a conference for the six- Agnes Engbersen gave workshops on presentation tech- teenth time in the academic year 2018-2019. Students niques and speech skills that were very well appreciated by wrote a paper, participated in the review process, gave a the participants. She used the two minute madness presen- presentation and chaired a session during the conference. tation (see further on) as a starting point for improvements. The organizers Rein Smedinga and Michael Biehl Rein Smedinga was the overall coordinator, took care would like to thank all colleagues who cooperated in this of the administration and served as the main manager of SC@RUG by suggesting sets of papers to be used by the Nestor. students and by being expert reviewers during the review Students were asked to give a short presentation process. They also would like to thank Femke Kramer for halfway through the period. The aim of this so-called two- giving additional lectures and special thanks to Agnes Eng- minute madness was to advertise the full presentation and bersen for her very inspiring workshops on presentation at the same time offer the speakers the opportunity to prac- techniques and speech skills. tice speaking in front of an audience. The actual conference was organized by the students themselves. In fact half of the group was asked to fully or- Organizational matters ganize the day (i.e., prepare the time tables, invite people, look for sponsoring and a keynote speaker, create a web- SC@RUG 2019 was organized as follows: site, etc.). The other half acted as a chair and discussion Students were expected to work in teams of two. The stu- leader during one of the presentations. dent teams could choose between different sets of papers, Students were graded on the writing process, the re- that were made available through the digital learning envi- view process and on the presentation. Writing and rewrit- ronment of the university, Nestor. Each set of papers con- ing accounted for 35% (here we used the grades given by sisted of about three papers about the same subject (within the reviewers), the review process itself for 15% and the Computing Science). Some sets of papers contained con- presentation for 50% (including 10% for being a chair or flicting opinions. Students were instructed to write a sur- discussion leader during the conference and another 10% vey paper about the given subject including the different for the 2 minute madness presentation). For the grading of approaches discussed in the papers. They should compare the presentations we used the assessments from the audi- the theory in each of the papers in the set and draw their ence and calculated the average of these. own conclusions, potentially based on additional research The gradings of the draft and final paper were weighted of their own. marks of the review of the corresponding staff member After submission of the papers, each student was as- (50%) and the two students reviews (25% each). signed one paper to review using a standard review form. On 2 April 2019, the actual conference took place. The staff member who had provided the set of papers was Each paper was presented by both authors. We had a to- also asked to fill in such a form. Thus, each paper was re- tal of 20 student presentations this day. viewed three times (twice by peer reviewers and once by In this edition of SC@RUG students were videotaped the expert reviewer). Each review form was made available during their 2 minute madness presentation and during the to the authors through Nestor. conference itself using the video recording facilities of the All papers could be rewritten and resubmitted, also tak- University. The recordings were published on Nestor for ing into account the comments and suggestions from the self reflection. reviews. After resubmission each reviewer was asked to re- review the same paper and to conclude whether the paper had improved. Re-reviewers could accept or reject a paper. All accepted papers1 can be found in these proceedings. In her lectures about communication in science, Femke Kramer explained how researchers communicate their find- ings during conferences by delivering a compelling story- 1this year, all papers were accepted 3 About SC@RUG 2019 Website Since 2013, there is a website for the conference, see www.studentcolloquium.nl. Sponsoring The student organizers invited Nanne Huiges and Jelle van Wezel as keynote speakers from BelSimpel. The com- pany sponsored the event by providing lunch and coffee and drinks at the end of the event. Hence, we are very grateful to BelSimpel • for sponsoring this event. Thanks We could not have achieved the ambitious goals of this course without the invaluable help of the following expert reviewers: Lorenzo Amabili • Sha Ang • Michael Biehl • Frank Blaauw • Kerstin Bunte • Mauricio Cano • Heerko Groefsema • Dimka Karastoyanova • Jiri Kosinka • Michel Medema • Jorge A. Perez • Jos Roerdink • Jie Tan • and all other staff members who provided topics and pro- vided sets of papers. Also, the organizers would like to thank the Graduate school of Science for making it possible to publish these proceedings and sponsoring the awards for best presenta- tions and best paper for this conference. Rein Smedinga Michael Biehl 4 SC@RUG 2019 proceedings 2016 Sebastiaan van Loon and Jelle van Wezel A Comparison of Two Methods for Accumulating Distance Metrics Used in Distance Based Classifiers and Michel Medema and Thomas Hoeksema Providing Guidelines for Human-Centred Design in Resource Management Systems 2015 Diederik Greveling and Michael LeKander Comparing adaptive gradient descent learning rate Since the tenth SC@RUG in 2013 we added a new methods element: the awards for best presentation, best paper and and best 2 minute madness. Johannes Kruiger and Maarten Terpstra Hooking up forces to produce aesthetically pleasing graph Best 2 minute madness presentation awards layouts 2019 2014 Kareem Al-Saudi and Frank te Nijenhuis Diederik Lemkes and Laurence de Jong Deep learning for fracture detection in the cervical spine Pyschopathology network analysis 2018 2013 Marc Babtist and Sebastian Wehkamp Jelle Nauta and Sander Feringa Face Recognition from Low Resolution Images: A Image inpainting Comparative Study 2017 Best paper awards Stephanie Arevalo Arboleda and Ankita Dewan 2019 Unveiling storytelling and visualization of data Wesley Seubring and Derrick Timmerman 2016 A different approach to the selection of an optimal Michel Medema and Thomas Hoeksema hyperparameter optimisation method Implementing Human-Centered Design in Resource 2018 Management Systems Erik Bijl and Emilio Oldenziel 2015 A comparison of ensemble methods: AdaBoost and Diederik Greveling and Michael LeKander random forests Comparing adaptive gradient descent learning rate 2017 methods Michiel Straat and Jorrit Oosterhof 2014 Segmentation of blood vessels in retinal fundus images Arjen Zijlstra and Marc Holterman 2016 Tracking communities in dynamic social networks Ynte Tijsma and Jeroen Brandsma 2013 A Comparison of Context-Aware Power Management Robert Witte and Christiaan Arnoldus Systems Heterogeneous CPU-GPU task scheduling 2015 Jasper de Boer and Mathieu Kalksma Choosing between optical flow algorithms for UAV Best presentation awards position change measurement 2019 2014 Sjors Mallon and Niels Meima Lukas de Boer and Jan Veldthuis Dynamic Updates in Distributed Data
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Understanding Distributed Consensus
    What’s Live? Understanding Distributed Consensus∗ Saksham Chand Yanhong A. Liu Computer Science Department, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA {schand,liu}@cs.stonybrook.edu Abstract Distributed consensus algorithms such as Paxos have been studied extensively. They all use the same definition of safety. Liveness is especially important in practice despite well-known theoretical impossibility results. However, many different liveness proper- ties and assumptions have been stated, and there are no systematic comparisons for better understanding of these properties. This paper systematically studies and compares different liveness properties stated for over 30 prominent consensus algorithms and variants. We introduce a precise high- level language and formally specify these properties in the language. We then create a hierarchy of liveness properties combining two hierarchies of the assumptions used and a hierarchy of the assertions made, and compare the strengths and weaknesses of algorithms that ensure these properties. Our formal specifications and systematic comparisons led to the discovery of a range of problems in various stated liveness proper- ties, from too weak assumptions for which no liveness assertions can hold, to too strong assumptions making it trivial to achieve the assertions. We also developed TLA+ spec- ifications of these liveness properties, and we use model checking of execution steps to illustrate liveness patterns for Paxos. 1 Introduction arXiv:2001.04787v2 [cs.DC] 21 Jun 2021 Distributed systems are pervasive, where processes work with each other via message passing. For example, this article is available to the current reader owing to some distributed system. At the same time, distributed systems are highly complex, due to their unpredictable asyn- chronous nature in the presence of failures—processes can fail and later recover, and messages can be lost, delayed, reordered, and duplicated.
    [Show full text]
  • Formal Specification and Verification Stephan Merz
    Formal specification and verification Stephan Merz To cite this version: Stephan Merz. Formal specification and verification. Dahlia Malkhi. Concurrency: the Works of Leslie Lamport, 29, Association for Computing Machinery, pp.103-129, 2019, ACM Books, 10.1145/3335772.3335780. hal-02387780 HAL Id: hal-02387780 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-02387780 Submitted on 2 Dec 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Formal specification and verification Stephan Merz University of Lorraine, CNRS, Inria, LORIA, Nancy, France 1. Introduction Beyond his seminal contributions to the theory and the design of concurrent and distributed algorithms, Leslie Lamport has throughout his career worked on methods and formalisms for rigorously establishing the correctness of algorithms. Commenting on his first article about a method for proving the correctness of multi-process programs [32] on the website providing access to his collected writings [47], Lamport recalls that this interest originated in his submitting a flawed mutual-exclusion algorithm in the early 1970s. As a trained mathematician, Lamport is perfectly familiar with mathematical set theory, the standard formal foundation of classical mathematics. His career in industrial research environments and the fact that his main interest has been in algorithms, not formalisms, has certainly contributed to his designing reasoning methods that combine pragmatism and mathematical elegance.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft® Product List 2012
    October 1 Microsoft® Product List 2012 The Microsoft Product List provides information monthly about Microsoft software and Online Services licensed through Microsoft Volume Licensing programs. © 2012 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 173 Published October 2012 Microsoft is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT The Microsoft Product List provides information monthly about Microsoft software and Online Services licensed through Microsoft Volume Licensing programs. The information described in the Microsoft Product List includes: Availability of new software and products offered through Microsoft Volume Licensing 1. Discontinuation of software and products offered through Microsoft Volume Licensing 2. Software and product designation regarding the Microsoft Volume Licensing product pool 3. The point value for each software and product technology 4. Available promotions 5. Migration paths from one version of software to another version of that same software 6. Migration paths from discontinued software to new software versions 7. Software Assurance benefits 8. Other Notes and information specific to software and products HOW TO USE THE MICROSOFT PRODUCT LIST Please familiarize yourself with the Chart Key following the steps noted below. Step 1: Locate the software you are considering in the table. Step 2: Review the information in the columns for available promotions, Software Assurance benefits, point counts, program availability, etc. Step 3: Some software will also have a footnote regarding additional information. If applicable, “click” (Ctrl + click) on the footnote number, which will bring you directly to the applicable text; or refer to the identified footnote in the pages that follow the table for that additional information.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Groningen 16Th SC@RUG 2019 Proceedings 2018-2019 Smedinga, Reinder
    University of Groningen 16th SC@RUG 2019 proceedings 2018-2019 Smedinga, Reinder; Biehl, Michael IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Publication date: 2019 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Smedinga, R., & Biehl, M. (Eds.) (2019). 16th SC@RUG 2019 proceedings 2018-2019. Bibliotheek der R.U. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 10-10-2021 faculty of science computing science faculty of science computing science and engineering and engineering 1 6 th SC @ RUG 201 SC@RUG 2019 proceedings 8 -201 9 16th SC@RUG 2018-2019 Rein Smedinga, Michael Biehl (editors) rug.nl/research/bernoulli R20170190_omslag_SC_RUG2018_.indd 3 01-05-18 13:11 SC@RUG 2019 proceedings Rein Smedinga Michael Biehl editors 2019 Groningen ISBN (e-pub): 978-94-034-1664-9 ISBN (book): 978-94-034-1665-6 Publisher: Bibliotheek der R.U.
    [Show full text]