Abstract-Over the Internet today, computing and communications environments are significantly more complex and chaotic than classical distributed systems, lacking any centralized organization or hierarchical control. There has been much interest in emerging Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network overlays because they provide a good substrate for creating large-scale data sharing, content distribution and application-level multicast applications. These P2P networks try to provide a long list of features such as: selection of nearby peers, redundant storage, efficient search/location of data items, data permanence or guarantees, hierarchical naming, trust and authentication, and, anonymity. P2P networks potentially offer an efficient routing architecture that is self-organizing, massively scalable, and robust in the wide-area, combining fault tolerance, load balancing and explicit notion of locality. In this paper, we present a survey and comparison of various Structured and Unstructured P2P networks. We categorize the various schemes into these two groups in the design spectrum and discuss the application-level network performance of each group.
The emergence of total quality management and the ISO 9000 suite of standards has allowed a re‐think of how (and why) the post‐implementation evaluation of computer systems is to be carried out. Traditional performance measurement, modeling and analysis techniques – while not discredited – have been tempered with a more holistic ideology. This article recommends a socio‐technical approach to determining the quality of a computer information system. In this context, two postulates have been proposed and tested by field survey of expert systems in the insurance industry in North America. Postulate one focuses on a multidimensional concept of IS quality comprising the characteristics of task, technology, people and organization. Postulate two deals with differences in assessments of these characteristics according to stakeholder groups: managers, developers, and users. Summarizes the key findings of these postulates in the context of the TQM and ISO 9000 philosophies.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to report the results of using the framework in the field for the purpose of formulating knowledge policies. The framework derives from a conceptual model for analyzing knowledge development overviewed by the authors in a previous paper.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses the conceptual framework of 13 dimensions for knowledge policy‐making analysis and qualitative focus group discussions by means of what is known as a knowledge SWOT analysis. Such an exercise ordinarily determines what is termed as net strength (strengths offset by weaknesses) and net opportunity (opportunities offset by threats).FindingsThe field research suggests that, whereas quantitative indicators are very commonly used for the purpose of benchmarking and progress tracking, they are limited in terms of determining causes, effects and encapsulating good practices. The present framework provides a means for policy‐makers and analysts to engage in discussion, debates, story‐telling and scenario building in order to understand net strengths and opportunities.Research limitations/implicationsThe research is limited by the time constraints of the focus group participants and it is not feasible to conduct a K‐SWOT of more than the four societies used for the reason that there are insufficient numbers of informed participants.Practical implicationsDeveloping the knowledge economy has to be more than a management of socio‐economic indicators. Understanding the net strength and opportunity faced by a society in the context of a global knowledge economy allowed insights into gaps that may be addressed with appropriate knowledge policies. There is much work to be done in formulating implementable policy recommendations.Originality/valueIt is hoped that a useful and valid policy analysis tool for knowledge development has thus been described.
PurposeThe research reported in this ongoing study aims to investigate the notion of knowledge assets developed within digital communities in the course of their economic or leisure activities. Ideally, the resulting knowledge is universal, affordable and relevant; this inclusiveness is a hallmark of any information or knowledge society.Design/methodology/approachThe authors first synthesize the related research literature covering the areas of knowledge‐based economies, knowledge societies and knowledge policies. A model using 13 dimensions is then developed, which the authors claim is critical for creating a knowledge community in the digital economy. The model is validated against critique from a Delphi panel of researchers in the area.FindingsWhile creating a knowledge society encompasses dimensions pertaining to infrastructure, governance, talent and culture, intangible assets are key to sustaining such societies. Governance and culture are instances of such intangibles. Talent may seem to be tangible but the human capacity for learning and development, which leads to an innovative culture, is less so. In any case, time is the essential ingredient for a knowledge culture to come about.Research limitations/implicationsKnowledge societies are not measurable constructs that can be described quantitatively and benchmarked with weighted summations of scores along prescribed dimensions. It would be a fallacy to treat the notion of a knowledge index as a socio‐economic measure of success.Practical implications. conclude with a practical view of how the dimensions may be best exploited in the course of a policy discussion on sustainable knowledge societies.Originality/valueIt is hoped that the research will provide a framework for policy makers and analysts to conduct qualitative discussions on creating and sustaining knowledge societies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.