In your own understanding, what's the difference between "METHOD" and "METHODOLOGY"?
Hmmn… Actually when I first read about this question, a lot of ideas are occurring in my mind. And somehow it made me think so deeply. Stop! I was really about to post the answer of this question when something unexpected happen. Would you believe that I accidentally deleted the words in the document and saved it? It was really annoying! It was better if I could have deleted the document itself because I can restore it from the recycle bin. But just imagine what I did? It’s really an OMG! So much for that, let’s go back to the question being asked (I was just telling my unfortunate experience).
So as I was saying, from my own point of view a method is a way of doing something. It could be also that it is carrying out something especially according to plan. For example in a math problem, we usually use “methods” in order to solve a problem or shall we say techniques and come up into a solution. So we can say – in other words – that methods are used to come up a solution to answer the problem being stated.
On other hand, I was thinking that a methodology is a study of methods or a study of a way of doing something or carrying out something, especially those according to plan (“ology” means study of, right?). So when I search about what a methodology is, I found a site (wikipedia.com) that stated that it is a systematic study of methods that can be applied within a discipline. It could also be an analysis of methods employed by a discipline (so I guess my thinking was right about the study thing). So to really visualize what a methodology is let’s have a concrete example. An example is a research paper; we all know that methodology is being used in research to define what methods will be used in developing. It can be a reference on how or where the data come from to attain successfully the objectives of the study.
I guess that would be all about method and methodology. Thanks for reading!
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Assign 6
Identify and discuss key factors for publishing research in top-tier journals like CSP, ACM, i3E, etc.
ACM, CSP, i3E and many others are just examples of some top-tier journal that published research papers in a usual manner and through the internet.
There was this article from ACM that talks about how the publications are done when the researchers submitted their paper. It is not an obscure thing to us what a research is. The publication of all research paper has been the center of its notion. It has been the basic means to disseminate the results or the research paper itself.
Before a research paper being published, it will be first reviewed by 3 or 4 reviewers (each paper) which are experts on this field of study. After being reviewed, the best research papers among the submitted ones are then accepted for publication in the journal or even in the conference proceedings. Actually, publishing a paper is usually done in some conferences or journals.
Every year there are thousands of research papers that are being submitted but the acceptance rate are often 20% or lower. Not all papers that are being submitted make it to the publication.
As I have read from the same site (ACM), there are still flaws in reviewing a research paper. Since judging a paper is not an easy thing to do, the reviewers is having a hard time assessing the paper’s impact, how relevant it is and even look at the topic – if it is interesting or not. Sometimes a research is rejected because of some bad reviews it because sometimes an author gets reviews criticizing the paper and saying the opposite thing. Having a research paper is somewhat a matter of luck, if your research will be accepted. It is because some reviewers are positive thinker, some are not. Reviewing takes a lot of time, most especially to those meticulous reviewers. That is why most authors do not write in a manner where the audiences can understand the paper but write in a manner that the reviewer would be please in their paper. Some common reviewers accepts very detailed papers than the more innovative and creative one.
Having these flaws, they made a different aura in reviewing a research paper. They made a conference which different from the traditional one where the author can not reply on how the reviewers review the paper. In the new one, the reviewers should not be acquainted by the author for the fair judgment. In here, the authors have a few days to rely on the reviewer’s question. There was also a community review to avoid flaws. The community can vote on paper/ or abstract that they like. Aside from the two mentioned, there is also what they called “open” in which all the participants can go to the conference and made their own judgment on the presentation they heard. There was also an invitation type of conference where the reviewers are those persons who are invited in the conference as judges. The authors then are required to present their works.
So, I guess a successful publication of a research depends on how good a research is and of course it depends also on the reviewers.
ACM, CSP, i3E and many others are just examples of some top-tier journal that published research papers in a usual manner and through the internet.
There was this article from ACM that talks about how the publications are done when the researchers submitted their paper. It is not an obscure thing to us what a research is. The publication of all research paper has been the center of its notion. It has been the basic means to disseminate the results or the research paper itself.
Before a research paper being published, it will be first reviewed by 3 or 4 reviewers (each paper) which are experts on this field of study. After being reviewed, the best research papers among the submitted ones are then accepted for publication in the journal or even in the conference proceedings. Actually, publishing a paper is usually done in some conferences or journals.
Every year there are thousands of research papers that are being submitted but the acceptance rate are often 20% or lower. Not all papers that are being submitted make it to the publication.
As I have read from the same site (ACM), there are still flaws in reviewing a research paper. Since judging a paper is not an easy thing to do, the reviewers is having a hard time assessing the paper’s impact, how relevant it is and even look at the topic – if it is interesting or not. Sometimes a research is rejected because of some bad reviews it because sometimes an author gets reviews criticizing the paper and saying the opposite thing. Having a research paper is somewhat a matter of luck, if your research will be accepted. It is because some reviewers are positive thinker, some are not. Reviewing takes a lot of time, most especially to those meticulous reviewers. That is why most authors do not write in a manner where the audiences can understand the paper but write in a manner that the reviewer would be please in their paper. Some common reviewers accepts very detailed papers than the more innovative and creative one.
Having these flaws, they made a different aura in reviewing a research paper. They made a conference which different from the traditional one where the author can not reply on how the reviewers review the paper. In the new one, the reviewers should not be acquainted by the author for the fair judgment. In here, the authors have a few days to rely on the reviewer’s question. There was also a community review to avoid flaws. The community can vote on paper/ or abstract that they like. Aside from the two mentioned, there is also what they called “open” in which all the participants can go to the conference and made their own judgment on the presentation they heard. There was also an invitation type of conference where the reviewers are those persons who are invited in the conference as judges. The authors then are required to present their works.
So, I guess a successful publication of a research depends on how good a research is and of course it depends also on the reviewers.
Assign 6
Identify and discuss key factors for publishing research in top-tier journals like CSP, ACM, i3E, etc.
ACM, CSP, i3E and many others are just examples of some top-tier journal that published research papers in a usual manner and through the internet.
There was this article from ACM that talks about how the publications are done when the researchers submitted their paper. It is not an obscure thing to us what a research is. The publication of all research paper has been the center of its notion. It has been the basic means to disseminate the results or the research paper itself.
Before a research paper being published, it will be first reviewed by 3 or 4 reviewers (each paper) which are experts on this field of study. After being reviewed, the best research papers among the submitted ones are then accepted for publication in the journal or even in the conference proceedings. Actually, publishing a paper is usually done in some conferences or journals.
Every year there are thousands of research papers that are being submitted but the acceptance rate are often 20% or lower. Not all papers that are being submitted make it to the publication.
As I have read from the same site (ACM), there are still flaws in reviewing a research paper. Since judging a paper is not an easy thing to do, the reviewers is having a hard time assessing the paper’s impact, how relevant it is and even look at the topic – if it is interesting or not. Sometimes a research is rejected because of some bad reviews it because sometimes an author gets reviews criticizing the paper and saying the opposite thing. Having a research paper is somewhat a matter of luck, if your research will be accepted. It is because some reviewers are positive thinker, some are not. Reviewing takes a lot of time, most especially to those meticulous reviewers. That is why most authors do not write in a manner where the audiences can understand the paper but write in a manner that the reviewer would be please in their paper. Some common reviewers accepts very detailed papers than the more innovative and creative one.
Having these flaws, they made a different aura in reviewing a research paper. They made a conference which different from the traditional one where the author can not reply on how the reviewers review the paper. In the new one, the reviewers should not be acquainted by the author for the fair judgment. In here, the authors have a few days to rely on the reviewer’s question. There was also a community review to avoid flaws. The community can vote on paper/ or abstract that they like. Aside from the two mentioned, there is also what they called “open” in which all the participants can go to the conference and made their own judgment on the presentation they heard. There was also an invitation type of conference where the reviewers are those persons who are invited in the conference as judges. The authors then are required to present their works.
So, I guess a successful publication of a research depends on how good a research is and of course it depends also on the reviewers.
ACM, CSP, i3E and many others are just examples of some top-tier journal that published research papers in a usual manner and through the internet.
There was this article from ACM that talks about how the publications are done when the researchers submitted their paper. It is not an obscure thing to us what a research is. The publication of all research paper has been the center of its notion. It has been the basic means to disseminate the results or the research paper itself.
Before a research paper being published, it will be first reviewed by 3 or 4 reviewers (each paper) which are experts on this field of study. After being reviewed, the best research papers among the submitted ones are then accepted for publication in the journal or even in the conference proceedings. Actually, publishing a paper is usually done in some conferences or journals.
Every year there are thousands of research papers that are being submitted but the acceptance rate are often 20% or lower. Not all papers that are being submitted make it to the publication.
As I have read from the same site (ACM), there are still flaws in reviewing a research paper. Since judging a paper is not an easy thing to do, the reviewers is having a hard time assessing the paper’s impact, how relevant it is and even look at the topic – if it is interesting or not. Sometimes a research is rejected because of some bad reviews it because sometimes an author gets reviews criticizing the paper and saying the opposite thing. Having a research paper is somewhat a matter of luck, if your research will be accepted. It is because some reviewers are positive thinker, some are not. Reviewing takes a lot of time, most especially to those meticulous reviewers. That is why most authors do not write in a manner where the audiences can understand the paper but write in a manner that the reviewer would be please in their paper. Some common reviewers accepts very detailed papers than the more innovative and creative one.
Having these flaws, they made a different aura in reviewing a research paper. They made a conference which different from the traditional one where the author can not reply on how the reviewers review the paper. In the new one, the reviewers should not be acquainted by the author for the fair judgment. In here, the authors have a few days to rely on the reviewer’s question. There was also a community review to avoid flaws. The community can vote on paper/ or abstract that they like. Aside from the two mentioned, there is also what they called “open” in which all the participants can go to the conference and made their own judgment on the presentation they heard. There was also an invitation type of conference where the reviewers are those persons who are invited in the conference as judges. The authors then are required to present their works.
So, I guess a successful publication of a research depends on how good a research is and of course it depends also on the reviewers.
Monday, October 5, 2009
assign 5
How do you know if a piece of research work is good or not? How are they evaluated? (1500words)
There are a lot of researches conducted by different people. If it’s not for a cure for a certain virus, it’s about how to lessen the burden of the people by making things high-tech or we can also say that it helps the people as well as the environment like what green computing is up to. But how do we really know if a piece of research is good and when is it not? Can we say that it is good if it actually solve a man’s problem? And if it is not, is it a bad one? These questions are exactly what are playing in my mind right now and I’ll try to answer it my way (tongue out).
In my point of view, research is somewhat searching a certain thing “again” for it to be more effective or realistic it could also mean an organized study or shall we say a methodical investigation into a subject in order to discover facts, to establish or revise a theory, or to develop a plan of action based on the facts discovered (according to Encarta). Most of the research is made to lessen the burden of every individual. It is a means of making an answer to every human’s dilemma that walks on earth. And in fact, it is a solution to everyone’s problem.
I can say that a research is good if it actually address a certain group of people’s (or even not) problem. If it solves or lessens or even an advancement of a certain technology, then we can say that it is a good research (well, I’m not sure about this but let me continue…). A research will be nothing if it doesn’t address certain people for it to solve their dilemmas. Because if it is not, then what’s the use of research anyway? Is it for fun..? (Grinning) Well, I think not. It’s not a realistic to do – making a research for fun - to think that lots of money will be spent if you just do it that way. But who knows maybe there is someone who makes it for fun or shall we say it’s his/her hobby (having a hobby is also a means of having fun, right?). We can never tell. Hmmn, I hope it doesn’t look like I contradicted myself (laugh).
I was thinking if there was a judging portion to be able to identify if a research paper is a good one or not aside from the fact that it can solve someone’s problem (confused). I guess maybe that’s why there is an evaluation made in every research paper (enlighten). One thing also, I was a bit confused if all research paper published were evaluated (ahh maybe that explains why most of the researches found in the internet are prone to be false because they were not evaluated [enlighten again]). But how are they being evaluated? Do they have any criteria for basis? Hmmn… It seems I have to search some answers for it. Might as well as google it (laugh).
Evaluating a research paper is somewhat a process to determine how good the paper is. I think there were standards on evaluating a research paper and even in publishing it. Based on what I have read most of the research that being published in the internet are prone to be false (that’s what I stated a while ago). So basically, my first statement does not cater on publishing it on the internet (but I think not all since there are top-tier journals who published researches in the internet). If that’s the case then I think there’s no way a student can identify which research paper is true and which is false, or can they? Most of us know that majority of the published writings on the internet don’t come from reliable source and if it is, you have to do a lot of hard work to find one (well, it’s based on my experience. I don’t know if you guys have also encountered the same problem with mine when it comes to this.)
If we say “evaluate”, it could mean that we consider or examine a certain thing in order to judge its value, quality, importance, extent, or condition. So going back to a research paper, we can say that a research paper is good if it pass the evaluation. I mean, if all in all the research paper has a great impact on the current situation and it helps a lot of people then maybe – just maybe we can categorize it as a good one. As far as I remember about the article I read about research paper is that (I read this a long time ago when I was looking on how to wrote a research paper [tongue out] I just thought this reading could help), a research should have a great impact on the current situation or current thread. How will you know that the research you’re working will be a great help if you don’t know what’s new? As I have said in my recent posts, the formulated problem and the suggested solution may be available already. Then the research you’re currently working might be useless. So basically, it has a lot to do with the current situation or technology which can benefit the consumers. For us to be able to decide of what the topic will be proposing we’ll go in depth (tongue out). The content of the research should have reliable sources and should not be based on some hearsay. There are a lot of sources in the internet but take note that not all the information found there are true. And if you only find the sources only in the internet then you must find a reliable one. Well, that’s what sad thing about making a research in a technical way because there is only little information and sometimes do not have some that we found in the books. We all know that the most reliable source are came from the books and because sometimes the topic we’ve chosen is in current thread then it is hard for us to find some information in the books or magazines then we have no choice but to look for it in the internet. Although it is not hard to search a certain article that could support the research we have but the question of is it reliable enough to be a source is still a question to be asked.
So having all the explanation above about making or writing a research topic/ paper, we can say that it is a good research. If it follows the do’s of writing a paper then maybe we can categorize it as a good one (well, it’s just my own point of view feel free to correct me then). Actually, there a lot of published research papers in the internet. As a matter of fact, there a several of research paper found in the web sites that are reliable enough to become a basis for a new research. Although I have stated it (I think a lot of times) that most of the research found in the internet are prone to be false, there are still a lot of research which are reliable especially those research that are being published by the top – tier journals like ACM, CSP and etc. As I have said, most are prone to be false – but take note that not all. So basically, we can still find good one and make it as a basis of a new one, right (I hope I didn’t contradicted myself or didn’t explain it in a way that is so confusing. But I guess I made it so confusing. So please just bear with me guys [tongue out].)?
So, what else should I say or rather write? Is there something else I forgot to mention? Well, I guess it only me who can answer these questions of mine and nothing else (laugh).
There are a lot of researches conducted by different people. If it’s not for a cure for a certain virus, it’s about how to lessen the burden of the people by making things high-tech or we can also say that it helps the people as well as the environment like what green computing is up to. But how do we really know if a piece of research is good and when is it not? Can we say that it is good if it actually solve a man’s problem? And if it is not, is it a bad one? These questions are exactly what are playing in my mind right now and I’ll try to answer it my way (tongue out).
In my point of view, research is somewhat searching a certain thing “again” for it to be more effective or realistic it could also mean an organized study or shall we say a methodical investigation into a subject in order to discover facts, to establish or revise a theory, or to develop a plan of action based on the facts discovered (according to Encarta). Most of the research is made to lessen the burden of every individual. It is a means of making an answer to every human’s dilemma that walks on earth. And in fact, it is a solution to everyone’s problem.
I can say that a research is good if it actually address a certain group of people’s (or even not) problem. If it solves or lessens or even an advancement of a certain technology, then we can say that it is a good research (well, I’m not sure about this but let me continue…). A research will be nothing if it doesn’t address certain people for it to solve their dilemmas. Because if it is not, then what’s the use of research anyway? Is it for fun..? (Grinning) Well, I think not. It’s not a realistic to do – making a research for fun - to think that lots of money will be spent if you just do it that way. But who knows maybe there is someone who makes it for fun or shall we say it’s his/her hobby (having a hobby is also a means of having fun, right?). We can never tell. Hmmn, I hope it doesn’t look like I contradicted myself (laugh).
I was thinking if there was a judging portion to be able to identify if a research paper is a good one or not aside from the fact that it can solve someone’s problem (confused). I guess maybe that’s why there is an evaluation made in every research paper (enlighten). One thing also, I was a bit confused if all research paper published were evaluated (ahh maybe that explains why most of the researches found in the internet are prone to be false because they were not evaluated [enlighten again]). But how are they being evaluated? Do they have any criteria for basis? Hmmn… It seems I have to search some answers for it. Might as well as google it (laugh).
Evaluating a research paper is somewhat a process to determine how good the paper is. I think there were standards on evaluating a research paper and even in publishing it. Based on what I have read most of the research that being published in the internet are prone to be false (that’s what I stated a while ago). So basically, my first statement does not cater on publishing it on the internet (but I think not all since there are top-tier journals who published researches in the internet). If that’s the case then I think there’s no way a student can identify which research paper is true and which is false, or can they? Most of us know that majority of the published writings on the internet don’t come from reliable source and if it is, you have to do a lot of hard work to find one (well, it’s based on my experience. I don’t know if you guys have also encountered the same problem with mine when it comes to this.)
If we say “evaluate”, it could mean that we consider or examine a certain thing in order to judge its value, quality, importance, extent, or condition. So going back to a research paper, we can say that a research paper is good if it pass the evaluation. I mean, if all in all the research paper has a great impact on the current situation and it helps a lot of people then maybe – just maybe we can categorize it as a good one. As far as I remember about the article I read about research paper is that (I read this a long time ago when I was looking on how to wrote a research paper [tongue out] I just thought this reading could help), a research should have a great impact on the current situation or current thread. How will you know that the research you’re working will be a great help if you don’t know what’s new? As I have said in my recent posts, the formulated problem and the suggested solution may be available already. Then the research you’re currently working might be useless. So basically, it has a lot to do with the current situation or technology which can benefit the consumers. For us to be able to decide of what the topic will be proposing we’ll go in depth (tongue out). The content of the research should have reliable sources and should not be based on some hearsay. There are a lot of sources in the internet but take note that not all the information found there are true. And if you only find the sources only in the internet then you must find a reliable one. Well, that’s what sad thing about making a research in a technical way because there is only little information and sometimes do not have some that we found in the books. We all know that the most reliable source are came from the books and because sometimes the topic we’ve chosen is in current thread then it is hard for us to find some information in the books or magazines then we have no choice but to look for it in the internet. Although it is not hard to search a certain article that could support the research we have but the question of is it reliable enough to be a source is still a question to be asked.
So having all the explanation above about making or writing a research topic/ paper, we can say that it is a good research. If it follows the do’s of writing a paper then maybe we can categorize it as a good one (well, it’s just my own point of view feel free to correct me then). Actually, there a lot of published research papers in the internet. As a matter of fact, there a several of research paper found in the web sites that are reliable enough to become a basis for a new research. Although I have stated it (I think a lot of times) that most of the research found in the internet are prone to be false, there are still a lot of research which are reliable especially those research that are being published by the top – tier journals like ACM, CSP and etc. As I have said, most are prone to be false – but take note that not all. So basically, we can still find good one and make it as a basis of a new one, right (I hope I didn’t contradicted myself or didn’t explain it in a way that is so confusing. But I guess I made it so confusing. So please just bear with me guys [tongue out].)?
So, what else should I say or rather write? Is there something else I forgot to mention? Well, I guess it only me who can answer these questions of mine and nothing else (laugh).
assign 1
THE FOUR PHASE OF METHOD FOR MODELLING COMPLEX SYSTEMS
Hamad I. Odhabi
Ray J. Paul
Robert D. Macredie
Centre for Applied Simulation Modelling (CASM)
Department of information Systems and Computing
Brunel University
Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, UNITE KINGDOM
This paper investigates the attempt to combine some different tools in order to build or make a simulation environment that can be used to model complex system. The tools used in this project or research are the four phase method, a simulation world view derived from the three phase approach especially for Object-Oriented and iconic and arcs; iconic representation that represents the actual system components and logic through using icons and arcs; Object-Oriented Programming and the MODSIM simulation library. They on using the discrete-event simulation modeling since it offers the people the chance to develop an understanding of their problem domain by building a simulation of the problem space in which they are interested. There are three broad perspectives that also being used as a basis of this paper which focuses on how to approach the development of simulation models.
The first perspective focuses on using a graphical user interface also known as GUI that allows user to build the model on the screen, connect the components by arcs to represent the model logic, and run the simulation (Drury and Laughery 1994). The second perspective is underpinned by the belief that no simulation program is able to model all types of system behavior without making some simplifications or modifications (Joines 1994). And lastly, the third perspective on which the paper will fully focus , concentrates on using a GUI that is able to automatically generate code, with the modeler making changes to the generated code to match the system needs (Hlupic and Paul 1994). The researchers are more concerned with two basic issues.
The first one concerns the modeling approach. Several programming approaches, often known as ‘simulation world views’, have been designed for discrete-event simulation modeling. The aim of any approach used should be to aid the production of a valid, working simulation at minimum cost or in shortest time (Pidd 1992.a)
The second issue concerns with the effect that cost of modifying the generated code which is the programming me4thodology. There are specific methodologies, reflecting particular programming paradigms which may support simplified model code comprehension, and therefore maintenance. Object-Oriented Programming (OOP), for example, has become popular in simulation modeling (Kienbaum and Paul 1994b), with a claim for relative ease of maintenance being made for the approach.
To address the both issues of modeling approach and programming methodology, this research was made. They introduce a new simulation world view termed the Four Phase Method (FPM), and discuss the importance in the context of iconic representations and the automatic generation of code.
The aim of the research is to attempt to combine a new simulation world view, OOP, and iconic representation to construct a simulation environment for the development of discrete-event simulation models. The modeling environment should be able to model complex system behavior, provide the user with a simple iconic representation to ‘drive’ the model design, and generate understandable code.
EVALUATION:
This research paper was actually, as stated above, about simulation which will create a new simulation world view which they named as the Four Phase Method (FPM). In which, they aimed to combine a new simulation world view or FPM, OOP, and iconic representation to construct a simulation environment for the development of discrete-event simulation models. It is where the modeling environment should be able to model complex systems behavior, provide the user with a simple iconic representation to ‘drive’ the model design, and generate understandable code.
The research paper was very organized from the introduction until to the conclusion of the paper. The variables are carefully explained and evaluated maybe because the writers/researchers are shall we say experts on the information technology industry. In model lay-outing and problem description, they stated that the problem being investigated is not of principal importance to the work, since it is mainly concerned with the modeling process on its own right. It could be an investigation of production quantity or the calculation of the average time that is required to produce a product. Identifying their problem in my point of view is somewhat unclear there were terms that as a normal person will be unclear. Since not all understands technical term.
SAEDES++: DETERMINING COMPLEX SYSTEM AVAILABILITY VIA SIMULATION
Javier Faulin
Department of Statistics and OR
Campus Arrosadia
Public University of Navarre
Pamplona, Navarre 31006, SPAIN
Angel A. Juan
Carles Serrat
Department of Applied Mathematics I
Av. Doctor Marañon, 44-50
Technical University of Catalonia
Barcelona, 08028, SPAIN
Vicente Bargueño
Department of Applied Mathematics I
ETS Ingenieros Industriales
Universidad Nacional de Educacion a Distancia
Madrid, 28080, SPAIN
This paper presents the researchers’ basic ideas behind a simulation-based method, called SAEDES, which can very useful when determining the availability for a wide range of complex systems. The method is implemented in C/C++ using two different algorithms, SAEDES_A1 (component-oriented) and SAEDES_A2 (system-oriented).The two case-studies are introduced and analyzed using both algorithms, which allows them to compare the associated results and became the basis. The ultimate objective of this method is to determine or estimate a complex system availability using the following information which is assumed to be known: system logical structure and failure-times and repair-times distributions for each component. The method is implemented using two different algorithms, SAEDES_A1 which uses MS and can be considered as component-oriented in the sense that it is based on the generation of each component history) and SAEDES_A2 which uses DES and can be considered as system-oriented in the sense that it is based on the generation of the system history.
The method presented in this paper, SAEDES, has been designed to deal with any kind of logical or physical system that meets some general criteria. The following assumptions are made:
1. Two-state systems: at any given time, the system will be either operational which is working properly or not
2. Coherent systems: the analyzed system is assumed to be coherent, in other words: if every component is operative the system will be operative, if no component is operative the system will not be operative, and a positive status change in a component (that is, from inoperative to operative) cannot cause a negative status change in the system (that is, the system will not change its status from operative to no operative)
3. Minimal paths decomposition: the system logical structure is known and it can be expressed in the form of minimal paths
4. Component failure-times and repair-times distributions: for each component, its associated failure-times and repair-times distributions are perfectly known
5. Maintainability policy: system is under a continuous inspection policy, that is any failure will be detected as soon as it will appear
6. Perfect reparations or substitutions: when a component fails, it is repaired or substituted by a new one; in any case, the result is as if a new component has been placed
7. Failure-times and repair-times independence: the failure-times associated to one specific component are independent from the failure-times associated to any other component; the same holds true for repair times.
Assumptions (1) to (4) guarantee that there is enough information to study the system reliability. Assumption (3) often requires a detailed analysis of logical relationships among components. In this sense, simulation algorithms have been proposed to find out the minimal path decomposition of a complex system (Lin and Donaghey 1993). In the assumption (4) context, statistical methods such as accelerated live tests (Meeker and Escobar 1998) and data fitting techniques (Leemis 2003) are usually required. Assumptions (5) and (6) are not restrictive in the sense that they could be relaxed, if necessary, by adapting the algorithms of the method.
Finally, assumption (7) is the most restrictive one and it may require considering some abstraction levels in the system decomposition.
SAEDES method and algorithms make use of several mathematical concepts and techniques. Specifically, the method is based on:
• System availability theory: system reliability and availability concepts, including minimal paths
theory (Barlow and Proschan 1996, Hoyland and Rausand 1994, Kovalenko et al. 1997, Pham (2003)
• Simulation techniques: data fitting, pseudorandom number generation, event treatment, and variance reduction methods (Banks 1998, Chung 2004, Law and Kelton 2000, L’Ecuyer 2002, Wang and Pham 1997)
• Probability and statistical concepts: probability theory, descriptive statistics and inference techniques (Ross 1996).
SAEDES can be very helpful for system managers and engineers in determining and improving complex systems availability. SAEDES is able to provide useful information about complex systems availability and can be applied in most situations where analytical methods are not well suited. Two different and alternative algorithms have been developed to perform SAEDES core functions. Both algorithms have been implemented as computer programs and used separately to analyze different complex systems. Different case studies have been conducted, showing that results from both algorithms are convergent, which contributes to validate the method and to add credibility to it.
EVALUATION:
Hmmmn.. This research paper (for me) is actually good. It’s just there are parts of the paper that is unclear such as using an acronym which they doesn’t include the meaning of it. If I were an ordinary person with no knowledge about technical term used in a computer industry, I won’t be able to understand it. I think the author should put the meaning in every acronym they used. Well, it’s just my own opinion.
Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Tobacco Related Mortality in a Prospective Study of Californians, 1960-98
James E. Enstrom
Geoffrey C. Kabat
The paper tackles about the tobacco which the main objective is to measure the relation between environmental tobacco smoke, as estimated by smoking in spouses, and long term mortality from tobacco related disease. This paper covers 39 years of prospective cohort study. Their main outcome measures the relative risks and the large percentage confidence intervals for deaths from coronary heart disease, lung cancer, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease related to smoking in spouses and active cigarette smoking. The results for participants followed from 1960 until 1998 the age adjusted relative risk (95% confidence interval) for never smokers married to ever smokers compared with never smokers married to never smokers was 0.94 (0.85 to 1.05) for coronary heart disease, 0.75 (0.42 to 1.35) for lung cancer, and 1.27 (0.78 to 2.08) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among 9619 men, and 1.01 (0.94 to 1.08), 0.99 (0.72 to 1.37), and 1.13 (0.80 to 1.58), respectively, among 25 942 women. No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke before or after adjusting for seven confounders and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease. No significant associations were found during the shorter follow up periods of 1960-5, 1966-72, 1973-85, and 1973-98.As years pass by, the percentage of smoking tobacco becomes bigger and the risk of death becomes larger. As a conclusion, the results of their survey do not support a casual relation between environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed.
Evaluation:
Actually, I was a little bit confused here not because of the research paper but because of the questions that pops up in my mind. I was confused because I was thinking if the research I summarized could be categorized as a scientific research. Well when I search the word “sample scientific research”, it appears. I guess it’s one of the “scientific researches”. Going back to the paper, figures and the way it is presented is good enough to understand by any individual.
Hamad I. Odhabi
Ray J. Paul
Robert D. Macredie
Centre for Applied Simulation Modelling (CASM)
Department of information Systems and Computing
Brunel University
Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, UNITE KINGDOM
This paper investigates the attempt to combine some different tools in order to build or make a simulation environment that can be used to model complex system. The tools used in this project or research are the four phase method, a simulation world view derived from the three phase approach especially for Object-Oriented and iconic and arcs; iconic representation that represents the actual system components and logic through using icons and arcs; Object-Oriented Programming and the MODSIM simulation library. They on using the discrete-event simulation modeling since it offers the people the chance to develop an understanding of their problem domain by building a simulation of the problem space in which they are interested. There are three broad perspectives that also being used as a basis of this paper which focuses on how to approach the development of simulation models.
The first perspective focuses on using a graphical user interface also known as GUI that allows user to build the model on the screen, connect the components by arcs to represent the model logic, and run the simulation (Drury and Laughery 1994). The second perspective is underpinned by the belief that no simulation program is able to model all types of system behavior without making some simplifications or modifications (Joines 1994). And lastly, the third perspective on which the paper will fully focus , concentrates on using a GUI that is able to automatically generate code, with the modeler making changes to the generated code to match the system needs (Hlupic and Paul 1994). The researchers are more concerned with two basic issues.
The first one concerns the modeling approach. Several programming approaches, often known as ‘simulation world views’, have been designed for discrete-event simulation modeling. The aim of any approach used should be to aid the production of a valid, working simulation at minimum cost or in shortest time (Pidd 1992.a)
The second issue concerns with the effect that cost of modifying the generated code which is the programming me4thodology. There are specific methodologies, reflecting particular programming paradigms which may support simplified model code comprehension, and therefore maintenance. Object-Oriented Programming (OOP), for example, has become popular in simulation modeling (Kienbaum and Paul 1994b), with a claim for relative ease of maintenance being made for the approach.
To address the both issues of modeling approach and programming methodology, this research was made. They introduce a new simulation world view termed the Four Phase Method (FPM), and discuss the importance in the context of iconic representations and the automatic generation of code.
The aim of the research is to attempt to combine a new simulation world view, OOP, and iconic representation to construct a simulation environment for the development of discrete-event simulation models. The modeling environment should be able to model complex system behavior, provide the user with a simple iconic representation to ‘drive’ the model design, and generate understandable code.
EVALUATION:
This research paper was actually, as stated above, about simulation which will create a new simulation world view which they named as the Four Phase Method (FPM). In which, they aimed to combine a new simulation world view or FPM, OOP, and iconic representation to construct a simulation environment for the development of discrete-event simulation models. It is where the modeling environment should be able to model complex systems behavior, provide the user with a simple iconic representation to ‘drive’ the model design, and generate understandable code.
The research paper was very organized from the introduction until to the conclusion of the paper. The variables are carefully explained and evaluated maybe because the writers/researchers are shall we say experts on the information technology industry. In model lay-outing and problem description, they stated that the problem being investigated is not of principal importance to the work, since it is mainly concerned with the modeling process on its own right. It could be an investigation of production quantity or the calculation of the average time that is required to produce a product. Identifying their problem in my point of view is somewhat unclear there were terms that as a normal person will be unclear. Since not all understands technical term.
SAEDES++: DETERMINING COMPLEX SYSTEM AVAILABILITY VIA SIMULATION
Javier Faulin
Department of Statistics and OR
Campus Arrosadia
Public University of Navarre
Pamplona, Navarre 31006, SPAIN
Angel A. Juan
Carles Serrat
Department of Applied Mathematics I
Av. Doctor Marañon, 44-50
Technical University of Catalonia
Barcelona, 08028, SPAIN
Vicente Bargueño
Department of Applied Mathematics I
ETS Ingenieros Industriales
Universidad Nacional de Educacion a Distancia
Madrid, 28080, SPAIN
This paper presents the researchers’ basic ideas behind a simulation-based method, called SAEDES, which can very useful when determining the availability for a wide range of complex systems. The method is implemented in C/C++ using two different algorithms, SAEDES_A1 (component-oriented) and SAEDES_A2 (system-oriented).The two case-studies are introduced and analyzed using both algorithms, which allows them to compare the associated results and became the basis. The ultimate objective of this method is to determine or estimate a complex system availability using the following information which is assumed to be known: system logical structure and failure-times and repair-times distributions for each component. The method is implemented using two different algorithms, SAEDES_A1 which uses MS and can be considered as component-oriented in the sense that it is based on the generation of each component history) and SAEDES_A2 which uses DES and can be considered as system-oriented in the sense that it is based on the generation of the system history.
The method presented in this paper, SAEDES, has been designed to deal with any kind of logical or physical system that meets some general criteria. The following assumptions are made:
1. Two-state systems: at any given time, the system will be either operational which is working properly or not
2. Coherent systems: the analyzed system is assumed to be coherent, in other words: if every component is operative the system will be operative, if no component is operative the system will not be operative, and a positive status change in a component (that is, from inoperative to operative) cannot cause a negative status change in the system (that is, the system will not change its status from operative to no operative)
3. Minimal paths decomposition: the system logical structure is known and it can be expressed in the form of minimal paths
4. Component failure-times and repair-times distributions: for each component, its associated failure-times and repair-times distributions are perfectly known
5. Maintainability policy: system is under a continuous inspection policy, that is any failure will be detected as soon as it will appear
6. Perfect reparations or substitutions: when a component fails, it is repaired or substituted by a new one; in any case, the result is as if a new component has been placed
7. Failure-times and repair-times independence: the failure-times associated to one specific component are independent from the failure-times associated to any other component; the same holds true for repair times.
Assumptions (1) to (4) guarantee that there is enough information to study the system reliability. Assumption (3) often requires a detailed analysis of logical relationships among components. In this sense, simulation algorithms have been proposed to find out the minimal path decomposition of a complex system (Lin and Donaghey 1993). In the assumption (4) context, statistical methods such as accelerated live tests (Meeker and Escobar 1998) and data fitting techniques (Leemis 2003) are usually required. Assumptions (5) and (6) are not restrictive in the sense that they could be relaxed, if necessary, by adapting the algorithms of the method.
Finally, assumption (7) is the most restrictive one and it may require considering some abstraction levels in the system decomposition.
SAEDES method and algorithms make use of several mathematical concepts and techniques. Specifically, the method is based on:
• System availability theory: system reliability and availability concepts, including minimal paths
theory (Barlow and Proschan 1996, Hoyland and Rausand 1994, Kovalenko et al. 1997, Pham (2003)
• Simulation techniques: data fitting, pseudorandom number generation, event treatment, and variance reduction methods (Banks 1998, Chung 2004, Law and Kelton 2000, L’Ecuyer 2002, Wang and Pham 1997)
• Probability and statistical concepts: probability theory, descriptive statistics and inference techniques (Ross 1996).
SAEDES can be very helpful for system managers and engineers in determining and improving complex systems availability. SAEDES is able to provide useful information about complex systems availability and can be applied in most situations where analytical methods are not well suited. Two different and alternative algorithms have been developed to perform SAEDES core functions. Both algorithms have been implemented as computer programs and used separately to analyze different complex systems. Different case studies have been conducted, showing that results from both algorithms are convergent, which contributes to validate the method and to add credibility to it.
EVALUATION:
Hmmmn.. This research paper (for me) is actually good. It’s just there are parts of the paper that is unclear such as using an acronym which they doesn’t include the meaning of it. If I were an ordinary person with no knowledge about technical term used in a computer industry, I won’t be able to understand it. I think the author should put the meaning in every acronym they used. Well, it’s just my own opinion.
Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Tobacco Related Mortality in a Prospective Study of Californians, 1960-98
James E. Enstrom
Geoffrey C. Kabat
The paper tackles about the tobacco which the main objective is to measure the relation between environmental tobacco smoke, as estimated by smoking in spouses, and long term mortality from tobacco related disease. This paper covers 39 years of prospective cohort study. Their main outcome measures the relative risks and the large percentage confidence intervals for deaths from coronary heart disease, lung cancer, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease related to smoking in spouses and active cigarette smoking. The results for participants followed from 1960 until 1998 the age adjusted relative risk (95% confidence interval) for never smokers married to ever smokers compared with never smokers married to never smokers was 0.94 (0.85 to 1.05) for coronary heart disease, 0.75 (0.42 to 1.35) for lung cancer, and 1.27 (0.78 to 2.08) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among 9619 men, and 1.01 (0.94 to 1.08), 0.99 (0.72 to 1.37), and 1.13 (0.80 to 1.58), respectively, among 25 942 women. No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke before or after adjusting for seven confounders and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease. No significant associations were found during the shorter follow up periods of 1960-5, 1966-72, 1973-85, and 1973-98.As years pass by, the percentage of smoking tobacco becomes bigger and the risk of death becomes larger. As a conclusion, the results of their survey do not support a casual relation between environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed.
Evaluation:
Actually, I was a little bit confused here not because of the research paper but because of the questions that pops up in my mind. I was confused because I was thinking if the research I summarized could be categorized as a scientific research. Well when I search the word “sample scientific research”, it appears. I guess it’s one of the “scientific researches”. Going back to the paper, figures and the way it is presented is good enough to understand by any individual.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Assignment 4
What do you think is the role of research topic in deciding your future career? (1500 words)
It has a big impact in any career you want if you have a good research or even deciding on what research you want to work with. I guess it is because it reflects on what you really want to be in the near future.
In my own point of view, the first role of the research topic in deciding student’s future (to be more realistic –my future: p) is that it is one of the requirement to graduate (laugh). Well kidding aside, to be honest I guess that it has a lot to do in the things you want to do in the future.
I think there are a lot of roles in a research or even in a research topic. I just don’t know how to put this in words though the ideas are already tickling in my mind. Hmmmn… It’s somehow a confusing statement (grinning). Aside from the fact that I stated above, research is also one of the lamp of my/your future. Why did I say that? Well let us face the fact that without completing the entire requirement and one of these is research, the dream of dressing a black cloth will be just an imagination. Sad to say, it will never unless you comply all the requirements. Going back to research, there are companies who support or even hire a person who has a good research topic (well, that’s what I found out after searching). And maybe that’s the reason, why it has a lot to do with my future or rather say deciding on my own future career.
Actually as I was walking on the streets heading to my boarding house, I saw a pamphlet that says “wanted researcher”, with the amount of salary given if you will be hired. I was amazed because it’s not just a small amount but it tackles a lot of money! Not to mention that the company holds all the expenses spent on whatever study will be produced by the researcher. But of course, the topic should be in lined on their criteria and even in their so-called “topic coverage”.
Just by looking the tempting offer given by the pamphlets or even in the internet, I can say that having a good research topic is somewhat a stepping stone for a bright future. I was thinking that if someone wants to have the best salary in such pieces of paper, then being a researcher should be the first in their list on deciding a future career. But actually, being a researcher is not an easy thing to do, a lot of hard work (if you are hard working already, then you have to double it) is required to be able to succeed or even produced a good topic (I know that based on experience [laugh]). But I think that the hardest part on a research is finding the appropriate topic on a certain scope. And when you already have a topic, then its easy now to gather some data since a lot of resources are now available in the internet, you just have too find a source that is proven to be true since not all the sources given in the internet are proven to be true.
I guess I was out of the topic (laugh). I think one of the roles of research topic is that it will give some knowledge to us students what is the current thread in the industry on what is in today and which is not. I don’t know if it could be classified as a role. But I guess I could be (tongue out). Just like on what I have experienced in this semester. Our topic should be with the scope of green computing. Actually, when I heard about the term “Green Computing” I was thinking that it has something to do with color. What I mean is that the color of computing is green, easy as that. I really sounded like a silly person at that time. I don’t know if I swallow some mercury that’s why it seems my IQ has degraded. And to be honest, thinking about “Green Computing” made me think so hard what topic should I propose. As a matter of fact, I find it so hard to produce a good topic because at that time I really don’t know what the scope of being called as a “Green Computing”. I was really ashamed that “Green Computing” has been introduced a long time ago and even made some solutions to maneuver it. Even the other countries have already organized some group and even made a campaign for it. Well shamed on me, I don’t know about that not before it was introduced to be or scope for our topic.
So I was thinking that in a research, the students will be taught how to gather some data by themselves. And even taught on how to be independent on something, what I mean is that the students were taught on how to stand in their own feet. Not just relying on what the instructors have said or teach in the four corners of the room. Having me as an example, because of the scope of the topic given to us, I was able to know the new threads of the computer world that supports green computing. Now I know that there is some software that helps us not just as a student but also helps the mother earth. And because of our scope, we were able to come up also a research topic that helps a certain group of people as well as the environment. Now I already know that most of the machines being made for the convenience of the people made the earth suffer from the effect given by these machines. In other words, we made the environment be destroyed by the things that we built. (Ooppps… I sounded like an angry mother trying to scold some naughty children [laugh]). So, I found out that there are some software which hits two birds in one stone and it isn’t bad to be a research topic right….?
Well, that is the reason why I said that maybe – just maybe one of the roles of a research topic i9n deciding a future career for a student like me or even not is to be aware of the recent thread in the technology industry. See, it is because of this I already know what green computing is, for whom it is and even what is its purpose.
Doing a research is somewhat gaining your knowledge about something (that’s what I thought based on experienced [grinning]). I mean everything your interested about. As I said a while ago that choosing a topic can be a reflection of what you want to do in the near future, just for example, those who formulate problems that intend to make solutions through software could be that they want to be a developer or a programmer someday. It could be also that the person who is good at gathering data could be a good researcher.
When I’m doing our research, there was a time that at the middle of my busy student life, I reflected on what I wanted to be in the near future – I mean after I graduated. I realized then what I’m good at. Frankly speaking, I can say that I’m good (well, not really good but I guess I excel at it) at gathering data or even conducting some interviews or surveys (we didn’t conduct some interviews or even surveys in our research since we don’t need it. We are more on technical side and didn’t even touch the social thing. So since they say that interviews and surveying are on social research, we didn’t conduct it.) So after I found out what I’m good at, I suddenly know or rather say have the idea what possible job should I take. A job which I think would be fitted on me. Since then I realized many things on deciding what path I should take.
Actually, I didn’t know the current thread in the industry if we say technical. I didn’t even know what twitter is and how it differs from facebook and friendster (shame on me); the current software, technologies and many more. Yes, I am a computer science student and I’m aware that I should suppose to know the current threads in my chosen field of expertise. But sad to say, my learning was stuck at the four corners of the room. Well, not until our instructors let us wander outside the university and made our learning in the real scenario of being a “technical person” and one of that subjects is research. But of course, you shouldn’t expect that you could just find a good research topic in the four corners of the room. One thing also is that you shouldn’t expect that you can also find a good one if you’re too old-fashioned and didn’t know the current thread. It is because you’re formulated problem and suggested solution might existing already. Well, that’s what I experienced. :p
It has a big impact in any career you want if you have a good research or even deciding on what research you want to work with. I guess it is because it reflects on what you really want to be in the near future.
In my own point of view, the first role of the research topic in deciding student’s future (to be more realistic –my future: p) is that it is one of the requirement to graduate (laugh). Well kidding aside, to be honest I guess that it has a lot to do in the things you want to do in the future.
I think there are a lot of roles in a research or even in a research topic. I just don’t know how to put this in words though the ideas are already tickling in my mind. Hmmmn… It’s somehow a confusing statement (grinning). Aside from the fact that I stated above, research is also one of the lamp of my/your future. Why did I say that? Well let us face the fact that without completing the entire requirement and one of these is research, the dream of dressing a black cloth will be just an imagination. Sad to say, it will never unless you comply all the requirements. Going back to research, there are companies who support or even hire a person who has a good research topic (well, that’s what I found out after searching). And maybe that’s the reason, why it has a lot to do with my future or rather say deciding on my own future career.
Actually as I was walking on the streets heading to my boarding house, I saw a pamphlet that says “wanted researcher”, with the amount of salary given if you will be hired. I was amazed because it’s not just a small amount but it tackles a lot of money! Not to mention that the company holds all the expenses spent on whatever study will be produced by the researcher. But of course, the topic should be in lined on their criteria and even in their so-called “topic coverage”.
Just by looking the tempting offer given by the pamphlets or even in the internet, I can say that having a good research topic is somewhat a stepping stone for a bright future. I was thinking that if someone wants to have the best salary in such pieces of paper, then being a researcher should be the first in their list on deciding a future career. But actually, being a researcher is not an easy thing to do, a lot of hard work (if you are hard working already, then you have to double it) is required to be able to succeed or even produced a good topic (I know that based on experience [laugh]). But I think that the hardest part on a research is finding the appropriate topic on a certain scope. And when you already have a topic, then its easy now to gather some data since a lot of resources are now available in the internet, you just have too find a source that is proven to be true since not all the sources given in the internet are proven to be true.
I guess I was out of the topic (laugh). I think one of the roles of research topic is that it will give some knowledge to us students what is the current thread in the industry on what is in today and which is not. I don’t know if it could be classified as a role. But I guess I could be (tongue out). Just like on what I have experienced in this semester. Our topic should be with the scope of green computing. Actually, when I heard about the term “Green Computing” I was thinking that it has something to do with color. What I mean is that the color of computing is green, easy as that. I really sounded like a silly person at that time. I don’t know if I swallow some mercury that’s why it seems my IQ has degraded. And to be honest, thinking about “Green Computing” made me think so hard what topic should I propose. As a matter of fact, I find it so hard to produce a good topic because at that time I really don’t know what the scope of being called as a “Green Computing”. I was really ashamed that “Green Computing” has been introduced a long time ago and even made some solutions to maneuver it. Even the other countries have already organized some group and even made a campaign for it. Well shamed on me, I don’t know about that not before it was introduced to be or scope for our topic.
So I was thinking that in a research, the students will be taught how to gather some data by themselves. And even taught on how to be independent on something, what I mean is that the students were taught on how to stand in their own feet. Not just relying on what the instructors have said or teach in the four corners of the room. Having me as an example, because of the scope of the topic given to us, I was able to know the new threads of the computer world that supports green computing. Now I know that there is some software that helps us not just as a student but also helps the mother earth. And because of our scope, we were able to come up also a research topic that helps a certain group of people as well as the environment. Now I already know that most of the machines being made for the convenience of the people made the earth suffer from the effect given by these machines. In other words, we made the environment be destroyed by the things that we built. (Ooppps… I sounded like an angry mother trying to scold some naughty children [laugh]). So, I found out that there are some software which hits two birds in one stone and it isn’t bad to be a research topic right….?
Well, that is the reason why I said that maybe – just maybe one of the roles of a research topic i9n deciding a future career for a student like me or even not is to be aware of the recent thread in the technology industry. See, it is because of this I already know what green computing is, for whom it is and even what is its purpose.
Doing a research is somewhat gaining your knowledge about something (that’s what I thought based on experienced [grinning]). I mean everything your interested about. As I said a while ago that choosing a topic can be a reflection of what you want to do in the near future, just for example, those who formulate problems that intend to make solutions through software could be that they want to be a developer or a programmer someday. It could be also that the person who is good at gathering data could be a good researcher.
When I’m doing our research, there was a time that at the middle of my busy student life, I reflected on what I wanted to be in the near future – I mean after I graduated. I realized then what I’m good at. Frankly speaking, I can say that I’m good (well, not really good but I guess I excel at it) at gathering data or even conducting some interviews or surveys (we didn’t conduct some interviews or even surveys in our research since we don’t need it. We are more on technical side and didn’t even touch the social thing. So since they say that interviews and surveying are on social research, we didn’t conduct it.) So after I found out what I’m good at, I suddenly know or rather say have the idea what possible job should I take. A job which I think would be fitted on me. Since then I realized many things on deciding what path I should take.
Actually, I didn’t know the current thread in the industry if we say technical. I didn’t even know what twitter is and how it differs from facebook and friendster (shame on me); the current software, technologies and many more. Yes, I am a computer science student and I’m aware that I should suppose to know the current threads in my chosen field of expertise. But sad to say, my learning was stuck at the four corners of the room. Well, not until our instructors let us wander outside the university and made our learning in the real scenario of being a “technical person” and one of that subjects is research. But of course, you shouldn’t expect that you could just find a good research topic in the four corners of the room. One thing also is that you shouldn’t expect that you can also find a good one if you’re too old-fashioned and didn’t know the current thread. It is because you’re formulated problem and suggested solution might existing already. Well, that’s what I experienced. :p
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)