Evaluation of the ICT Test Bed project: final report, June 2007

The report describes three strands of evaluation used in the review of the 2006 outcomes from ICT Test Bed and the findings from each strand. a) Quantitative data: Benchmarking of changes in performance on national tests against matched comparator schools and national averages; b) Qualitative data: Site visits including classroom observations, interviews with local authority managers, head teachers, teachers, administrative staff, technicians and students; and c) Document analysis

A classification of emerging and traditional grid systems

The grid has evolved in numerous distinct phases. It started in the early ’90s as a model of metacomputing in which supercomputers share resources; subsequently, researchers added the ability to share data. This is usually referred to as the first-generation grid. By the late ’90s, researchers had outlined the framework for second-generation grids, characterized by their use of grid middleware systems to “glue” different grid technologies together. Third-generation grids originated in the early millennium when Web technology was combined with second-generation grids. As a result, the invisible grid, in which grid complexity is fully hidden through resource virtualization, started receiving attention. Subsequently, grid researchers identified the requirement for semantically rich knowledge grids, in which middleware technologies are more intelligent and autonomic. Recently, the necessity for grids to support and extend the ambient intelligence vision has emerged. In AmI, humans are surrounded by computing technologies that are unobtrusively embedded in their surroundings. However, third-generation grids’ current architecture doesn’t meet the requirements of next-generation grids (NGG) and service-oriented knowledge utility (SOKU).4 A few years ago, a group of independent experts, arranged by the European Commission, identified these shortcomings as a way to identify potential European grid research priorities for 2010 and beyond. The experts envision grid systems’ information, knowledge, and processing capabilities as a set of utility services.3 Consequently, new grid systems are emerging to materialize these visions. Here, we review emerging grids and classify them to motivate further research and help establish a solid foundation in this rapidly evolving area

The Visvalingam algorithm: metrics, measures and heuristics

This paper provides the background necessary for a clear understanding of forthcoming papers relating to the Visvalingam algorithm for line generalisation, for example on the testing and usage of its implementations. It distinguishes the algorithm from implementation-specific issues to explain why it is possible to get inconsistent but equally valid output from different implementations. By tracing relevant developments within the now-disbanded Cartographic Information Systems Research Group (CISRG) of the University of Hull, it explains why a) a partial metric-driven implementation was, and still is, sufficient for many projects but not for others; b) why the Effective Area (EA) is a measure derived from a metric; c) why this measure (EA) may serve as a heuristic indicator for in-line feature segmentation and model-based generalisation; and, d) how metrics may be combined to change the order of point elimination. The issues discussed in this paper also apply to the use of other metrics. It is hoped that the background and guidance provided in this paper will enable others to participate in further research based on the algorithm