Knowledge-based reusable software synthesis system

The Eli system, a knowledge-based reusable software synthesis system, is being developed for NASA Langley under a Phase 2 SBIR contract. Named after Eli Whitney, the inventor of interchangeable parts, Eli assists engineers of large-scale software systems in reusing components while they are composing their software specifications or designs. Eli will identify reuse potential, search for components, select component variants, and synthesize components into the developer's specifications. The Eli project began as a Phase 1 SBIR to define a reusable software synthesis methodology that integrates reusabilityinto the top-down development process and to develop an approach for an expert system to promote and accomplish reuse. The objectives of the Eli Phase 2 work are to integrate advanced technologies to automate the development of reusable components within the context of large system developments, to integrate with user development methodologies without significant changes in method or learning of special languages, and to make reuse the easiest operation to perform. Eli will try to address a number of reuse problems including developing software with reusable components, managing reusable components, identifying reusable components, and transitioning reuse technology. Eli is both a library facility for classifying, storing, and retrieving reusable components and a design environment that emphasizes, encourages, and supports reuse

An Open Randomized Comparison of Gatifloxacin versus Cefixime for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Enteric Fever

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of gatifloxacin versus cefixime in the treatment of uncomplicated culture positive enteric fever. DESIGN: A randomized, open-label, active control trial with two parallel arms. SETTING: Emergency Room and Outpatient Clinics in Patan Hospital, Lagankhel, Lalitpur, Nepal. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with clinically diagnosed uncomplicated enteric fever meeting the inclusion criteria. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were allocated to receive one of two drugs, Gatifloxacin or Cefixime. The dosages used were Gatifloxacin 10 mg/kg, given once daily for 7 days, or Cefixime 20 mg/kg/day given in two divided doses for 7 days. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was fever clearance time. The secondary outcome measure was overall treatment failure (acute treatment failure and relapse). RESULTS: Randomization was carried out in 390 patients before enrollment was suspended on the advice of the independent data safety monitoring board due to significant differences in both primary and secondary outcome measures in the two arms and the attainment of a priori defined endpoints. Median (95% confidence interval) fever clearance times were 92 hours (84-114 hours) for gatifloxacin recipients and 138 hours (105-164 hours) for cefixime-treated patients (Hazard Ratio[95%CI] = 2.171 [1.545-3.051], p<0.0001). 19 out of 70 (27%) patients who completed the 7 day trial had acute clinical failure in the cefixime group as compared to 1 out of 88 patients (1%) in gatifloxacin group(Odds Ratio [95%CI] = 0.031 [0.004 - 0.237], p<0.001). Overall treatment failure patients (relapsed patients plus acute treatment failure patients plus death) numbered 29. They were determined to be (95% confidence interval) 37.6 % (27.14%-50.2%) in the cefixime group and 3.5% (2.2%-11.5%) in the gatifloxacin group (HR[95%CI] = 0.084 [0.025-0.280], p<0.0001). There was one death in the cefixime group. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, gatifloxacin is a better treatment for uncomplicated enteric fever as compared to cefixime. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN75784880