Major service discovery technology : a hands-on analysis
2014
- 58Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage58
- Downloads53
- Abstract Views5
Thesis / Dissertation Description
In this thesis we look at the issue of properly comparing the major service discovery technologies. Relying on a theoretical comparison to make a decision on which service discovery technology to integrate with for service vendors or clients is not sufficient enough. There is quite a bit of research involved in order to read all the documentation on a technology and it's rare that you can find constructive criticism or issues mentioned by the technology manufacturer. Another issue is to know how much of a coding effort is involved in integrating a client and/or service application with a service discovery technology. Finally, we examine what to do when none of the major service discovery technologies offer all the capabilities that a service vendor or client is looking for. We break down the service discovery into its major components and then give an in-depth analysis of three major service discovery technologies, i.e., Bonjour, Jini, and UPnP, by comparing how they perform for each component. Next, we provide a practical hands-on analysis to demonstrate the coding effort involved to integrate clients/services with each of the service discovery technologies. Finally, we present an alternative service discovery design which merges the robust capabilities of all three technologies along with adding a filtering capability. This thesis allows service vendors and clients to make a practical hands-on comparison of the three major service discovery technologies, so that they make a well informed decision on which of the technologies to integrate with. If each of these technologies fail to meet all the requirements for a service or client, we presents a design for a new service discovery technology which contains all the robust capabilities of the three technologies merged into one while adding an extra event filtering capability.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know