Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
] [ X X E =
,
x
P X X E
0
'
0 0
] [ =
,
0 0
] [ U U E =
,
u
P U U E
0
'
0 0
] [ =
,
xu
P U X E
0
'
0 0
] [ =
.
Treating
k
X
and
k
U
as the augmented system state,
the AUSKE is described by
) (
| 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 | 1
Aug
k k
Aug
k k
Aug
k
Aug
k k
Aug
k k
X H Z K X X
+ + + + + + +
+ =
(4)
Aug
k k
Aug
k
Aug
k k
X A X
| | 1
=
+
(5)
1 '
1 | 1 1
'
1 | 1 1
] ) ( [ ) (
+ + + + + +
+ =
k
Aug
k k k
Aug
k
Aug
k k k
Aug
k
R H P H H P K
(6)
k
Aug
k k k
Aug
k k k
Q A P A P + =
+
'
| | 1
) (
(7)
k k
Aug
k
Aug
k k k
P H K I P
| 1 1 1 1 | 1
) (
+ + + + +
=
(8)
Where
(
=
k
k Aug
k
U
X
X
,
(
=
u
k
x
k Aug
k
K
K
K
,
(
=
u
k
xu
k
xu
k
x
k
k
P P
P P
P
'
) (
,
(
=
k n m
k k Aug
k
C
B A
A
0
,
'
0
(
=
m p
k Aug
k
H
H
,
(
=
u
k
xu
k
xu
k
x
k
k
Q Q
Q Q
Q
'
) (
Where the superscript Aug denotes the augmented
system state,
I
denotes the identity matrix of any
dimension and
n m
0
is a
n m
zero matrix. It is clear
from (4)-(8) that the computational cost of the AUSKE
increases with the augmented state dimension. The
OPSKE formulation is based on the following
equations:
)
(
| 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 | 1 k k k k k k k k k
X H Z K X X
+ + + + + + +
+ =
(9)
k k k k k
X A X
| | 1
=
+
(10)
1 '
1 | 1 1
'
1 | 1 1
] ) ( [
+ + + + + +
+ =
k k
x
k k k k
x
k k k
R H P H H P K
(11)
x
k k
x
k k k
x
k k
Q A P A P + =
+
'
| | 1
) (
(12)
x
k k k k
x
k k
P H K I P
| 1 1 1 1 | 1
) (
+ + + + +
=
(13)
1 1 1 1 + + + +
=
k k k k
M ] H K I [ N
(14)
]
~
[
| 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 | 1 k k k k k
u
k k k k k
U M H Z K U U
+ + + + + + + +
+ =
(15)
k k k k k
U C U
1
=
+
(16)
1
| 1
'
1
'
1 | 1 1 1
'
1
'
1 | 1 1
] 3 [ 2
+ + + + + + + + + +
+ =
z
k k k k
u
k k k k k k
u
k k
u
k
P H M P M H H M P K
(17)
u
k k k k
u
k
u
k k k
u
k k
u
k
z
k k
u
k
u
k k k
u
k k k k
u
k
u
k k
u
k k
P M H K K H M P K P K
K H M P M H K P P
| 1 1 1 1 1
'
1
'
1 | 1 1 | 1 1
1
'
1
'
1 | 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 | 1
2 ) ( 2 ) (
) ( 3
+ + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + +
' ' +
' + =
(18)
u
k k
u
k k k
u
k k
Q C P C P + =
+
'
| | 1
(19)
1
'
1 | 1 1 | 1 + + + + +
+ =
k k
x
k k k
z
k k
R H P H P
(20)
u
k k k k
zu
k k
P M H P
| 1 1 1 | 1 + + + +
=
(21)
1 1 | 1 | 1
+ + + +
+ =
k k k k k k
U M X X
1 1 1 | 1 1 | 1
+ + + + + +
+ =
k k k k k k
U N X X
(22)
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 9, SEPTEMBER 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617
https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 85
2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617
1
0 0 1
1
1
,.... 3 , 2 , ] [
+
=
= + =
C B M
k C B M A M
k k k k k
(23)
1 1 1 1
] [
+ + + +
=
k k k k
M H K I N
(24)
2. Performance Evaluations:
To demonstrate the computational advantage of the
OPSKE over the AUSKE, the number of arithmetic
operations are considered, i.e., multiplications and
summations. The arithmetic operations of a standard
Kalman estimator with state dimension
n
and
measurement dimension
p
, are listed in Table 1. It is
clear from the equations (4)-(8) and Table 1, that the
arithmetic operations required for the AUSKE which
has state dimension
m n+
and measurement dimension
p
, are
) , ( p m n M +
for multiplications and
) , ( p m n S +
for summations. Table 2 shows the arithmetic
operations of the input estimation and the auxiliary
matrices needed by the OPSKE which has state
dimension
n
, measurement dimension
p
and input
vector dimension
m
. Note that the number of the
arithmetic operations of the AUSKE increases with the
augmented state dimension, which makes the algorithm
computationally inefficient. In contrast, the OPSKE
based on the two-stage decoupling technique required
fewer computations. The efficiency of the OPSKE is
due to order reduction, i.e., implementing two less
order
n
and
m
partitioned filters. This enables the
proposed algorithm to have much better computational
efficiency than the AUSKE. So, the arithmetic
operations required (AOR) for the AUSKE are:
)] ( ) ( ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 [
] ) ( 2 ) ( ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 [
) , ( ) , ( ) (
2 3 2 2 3
2 3 2 2 3
m n m n p p m n p m n m n
p m n m n p p m n p m n m n
p m n S p m n M AUSKE AOR
+ + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + =
+ + + =
(25)
The arithmetic operations required for the input
estimation and auxiliary matrices, by the OPSKE as
shown in Table 2 and using equations (15)-(24) are
] 2 2 2
4 2 2 [
] 2 2 4
2 2 2 3 [
] 2 2 3 [
] 2 2 2 3 [
) , , ( ) , , ( ) , ( ) , (
) (
2 2 2 2
3 3 2 2 2
2 2 2 3
2 3 2 2 2
2 3 2 2 3
2 3 2 2 3
nmp nm m n n p np p n
m p mp p m m m mp
nmp nm m n nm p n m
p p mp p m m mp
n n p np p n n
np n p np p n n
p m n S p m n M p n S p n M
OPSKE AOR
OP OP
+ + + + +
+ + + + +
+ + + + + +
+ + + + + +
+ + + +
+ + + + + =
+ + + =
(26)
Using (25) and (26), the operational savings, denoted
by
OPSKE
AUSKE
OS
, of the OPSKE as compared to the AUSKE
are [17]:
nm p m n np p
nmp p n nm m n m
p m n S p m n M p n S
p n M p m n S p m n M
OPSKE AOR AUSKE AOR OS
OP OP
OPSKE
AUSKE
2 2 2 2
6 4 17 15 2
) , , ( ) , , ( ) , (
) , ( ) , ( ) , (
) ( ) (
2 2 3
2 2 2 3
+ +
+ + + =
+ + +
= =
(27)
And the operational savings of the OTSKE over the
AUSKE are:
nm p m m nmp nm m n
m OTSKE AOR AUSKE AOR OS
OTSKE
AUSKE
2 2 4 12 12
4 ) ( ) (
3 2 2 2
3
+ + +
+ = =
(28)
Therefore, using (27) and (28) the operational savings
of the OPSKE over the OTSKE are:
2 2 3 2 2
2 3
2 2 2 4 5
3 2 ) ( ) (
p m m n np p nmp p n nm
m n m OPSKE AOR OTSKE AOR OS
OPSKE
OTSKE
+ + + + +
+ = =
(29)
It is clear from (27) and (29) that for
n p m s and
, the
proposed scheme has computational advantage over
the AUSKE and it is comparable to the OTSKE. The
operational savings discussed here will be tested as an
example in the simulation results section. To measure
the relative operational savings of the OPSKE with
respect to the arithmetic operation required by the
AUSKE (
) (AUSKE AOR
), the percentage of the
operational savings defined as below:
100
) (
=
AUSKE AOR
OS
POS
OPSKE
AUSKE OPSKE
AUSKE
(30)
Using (27), (29) and (30), the operational savings and
the percentage of the operational savings, of the
OPSKE comparing to the OTSKE and the AUSKE for
different values of
n
,
m
and
p
are shown in Table 3.
It can be inferred from Table 3 that the OPSKE has
better overall performance than the AUSKE (averaged
32%) and the OTSKE (averaged 7.3%).
Table 1:Standard Kalman Estimator Arithmetic Operation Requirements
Variable
Number of Multiplications,
) p , n ( M
Number of summations,
) p , n ( S
1
1 1 + + k | k
X
np 2
np 2
2
k | K
X
1 +
2
n
n n
2
3
x
k
K
1 +
3 2 2
2 p np p n + +
np p np p n 2 2
3 2 2
+ +
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 9, SEPTEMBER 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617
https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 86
2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617
4
x
k | K
P
1 +
3
2n
2 3
2 n n
5
x
k | K
P
1 1 + +
p n n
2 3
+
2 2 3
n p n n +
Totals
np n p np p n n 2 2 2 3
2 3 2 2 3
+ + + + +
n n p np p n n + + +
2 3 2 2 3
2 2 3
Table 2:Input Estimation and Auxiliary Matrices Arithmetic Operation Requirements for the OPSKE
Variable
Number of Multiplications
) p , m , n ( M
OP
Number of summations
) p , m , n ( S
OP
1
1 1 + + k | k
U
mp 2
mp 2
2
k | K
U
1 +
2
m
m m
2
3
u
k
K
1 +
mp p p mp p m + + + +
2 3 2 2
2
mp p mp p m 2 2
3 2 2
+ +
4
u
k | K
P
1 +
3
2m
2 3
2 m m
5
u
k | K
P
1 1 + +
2 2 3
m p m m + +
2 2 3
m p m m +
6
z
k | k
P
1 +
p n
2
2
2 2
2 2 p np p n +
7
k | k
X
1 +
mn
mn
8
1 1 + + k | k
X
mn
n mn
9
1 + k
M
2 3 2
nm m m n + +
nm nm m m n + +
2 3 2
10
1 + k
N
m n
2
nm m n
2
11
1 1 + + k k
M H
nmp
mp nmp
Totals
nmp nm m n nm p n m
p p mp p m m mp
+ + + + + +
+ + + + +
2 2 2 3
2 3 2 2 2
2 2 4
2 2 2 3
nmp nm m n n p np p n
m p mp p m m m mp
+ + + + +
+ + + +
2 2 2 2
3 3 2 2 2
2 2 2
4 2 2
Table 3:the Operational Savings and the Percentage of the Operational Savings of the OPSKE
Compared to the AUSKE and the OTSKE
The state vector
dimensions
OPSKE
AUSKE
OS
OPSKE
AUSKE
POS
(%)
OPSKE
OTSKE
OS
OPSKE
OTSKE
POS
(%)
2 4 4 = = = p , m , n
1340 35.7 592 15.7
2 2 4 = = = p , m , n
578 33.7 102 5.9
1 2 4 = = = p , m , n
553 37.5 155 10.5
1 1 4 = = = p , m , n
242 27.5 23 2.6
3 3 4 = = = p , m , n
978 32.7 247 8.2
2 2 10 = = = p , m , n
2954 25.1 132 1.12
Average
~
1107 32.0
~
208 7.3
3. Simulation Results:
To evaluate the proposed algorithm, an example of
maneuvering target tracking problem which turns, in
two-dimensional space is simulated such as
permeating a hacker into a very important network or
databases. In this simulation example, the
performance of the OPSKE for the maneuvering
target tracking has been compared with the
traditional works that done in this concept, as an
example of the AUSKE method. As mentioned before
in the augmented state method the state vector
includes the input vector i.e., acceleration and jerk
parameter in maneuvering target tracking problem.
The sampling interval is T=0.01 (sec) and target
maneuver is applied at 9th second (900th sample).
The initial conditions are selected similar for the
AUSKE as well as the OPSKE. The state vectors are
| |'
y
k k
x
k k k
v y v x X =
,
| |'
y
k
y
k
x
k
x
k k
j u j u U =
,
| |'
y
k
y
k
x
k
x
k
y
k k
x
k k
Aug
k
j u j u v y v x X =
Where
k
x
,
x
k
v
,
x
k
u
and
x
k
j
denote the position, velocity,
acceleration and jerk of the target along the
x
axis,
respectively. We consider the target initial conditions
for the state and the acceleration vectors as below:
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 9, SEPTEMBER 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617
https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 87
2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617
| |' s / m m s / m m X 25 1250 80 2165
0
=
,
| |' sec / g g sec / g g U 0 0 0 0
0
=
| |' sec / 0 0 sec / 0 0 / 25 1250 / 80 2165
0
g g g g s m m s m m X
Aug
=
The target begins to maneuver as
| |' sec / 4 . 0 0 sec / 7 . 0 0
900
g g g g U =
for
sec) ( 90 (sec) 9 s st
.
The system matrices are given by
(
(
(
(
=
1 0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 1
T
T
A
k
,
(
(
(
(
(
=
2 / 0 0
6 / 2 / 0 0
0 0 2 /
0 0 6 / 2 /
2
3 2
2
3 2
T T
T T
T T
T T
B
k
,
(
(
(
(
=
1 0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 1
T
T
C
k
,
'
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 1
(
(
(
(
=
k
H
(
(
(
(
(
=
T T
T T
T T
T T
Q
j
u
k
2 / 0 0
2 / 3 / 0 0
0 0 2 /
0 0 2 / 3 /
2
2
2 3
2
2 3
oo
,
(
(
(
(
(
=
20 / 72 / 0 0
72 / 252 / 0 0
0 0 20 / 72 /
0 0 72 / 252 /
2
5 6
6 7
5 6
6 7
T T
T T
T T
T T
Q
j
x
k
oo
(
(
(
(
(
=
6 / 8 / 0 0
24 / 30 / 0 0
0 0 6 / 8 /
0 0 24 / 30 /
2
3 4
4 5
3 4
4 5
T T
T T
T T
T T
Q
j
xu
k
oo
,
4 4 0
10
= I P
x
,
4 4
1 . 0
= I P
u
o
,
4 4 0
= I P
xu
,
'
4 2
0
(
k Aug
k
H
H
(
=
k
k k Aug
k
C
B A
A
4 4
0
,
(
=
u
k
xu
k
xu
k
x
k
k
Q Q
Q Q
Q
'
) (
,
(
=
u
k
xu
k
xu
k
x
k
k
P P
P P
P
'
) (
.
Where
) ( 09 . 0
3
= ms
j
o
the variance of the target is jerk
and
) (s 0123 . 0
-1
= o
is the reciprocal of the jerk time
constant
o t / 1 =
. The measurement standard
deviations of
x
and
y
target positions are:
) ( 10 10 m
x
= o
,
) ( 20 m
y
= o
. Thus, the measurement
covariance matrix is
(
=
400 0
0 1000
k
R
for both methods.
The Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) index is used
for the results evaluation.
Fig. 1 shows the actual value and the estimation of
x
and
y
and RMS errors of
x
and
y
positions
estimations by the proposed OPSKE and the AUSKE.
Fig. 2 shows the actual value and the estimations of
y x
v v ,
and the RMS errors of the
x
and
y
velocities
estimations by the proposed method compared with
the augmented method. The actual value and the
accelerations estimations in the
x
and
y
directions
and their corresponding averaged RMS errors can be
seen in Fig. 3.Fig. 4 displays the actual value and the
estimated jerk parameters are evaluated by the
OPSKE and the AUSKE methodologies.
10 15 20 25
-3
-2
-1
0
x 10
4
Time (sec)
x
(
m
)
Atcual position
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0
100
200
300
400
500
Time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
x
(
m
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
10 15 20 25
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
x 10
4
Time (sec)
y
(
m
)
Atcual position
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
y
(
m
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
Fig. 1. The actual value and the estimation of the x, y positions and RMS errors estimations by the OPSKE and
the AUSKE methods.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 9, SEPTEMBER 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617
https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 88
2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617
10 15 20 25
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
Time (sec)
v
x
(
m
/
s
e
c
)
Atcual velocity
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0
100
200
300
Time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
v
x
(
m
/
s
e
c
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
10 15 20 25
0
1000
2000
3000
Time (sec)
v
y
(
m
/
s
e
c
)
Atcual velocity
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0
50
100
150
200
250
Time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
v
y
(
m
/
s
e
c
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
Fig. 2. The actual value and the estimation of
y x
v , v
and RMS errors of x and y velocities estimations by the
OPSKE and the AUSKE methods.
10 15 20 25
-15
-10
-5
0
Time (sec)
u
x
(
m
/
s
e
c
2
)
Atcual acceleration
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
u
x
(
m
/
s
e
c
2
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
10 15 20 25
0
2
4
6
Time (sec)
u
y
(
m
/
s
e
c
2
)
Atcual acceleration
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
u
y
(
m
/
s
e
c
2
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
Fig. 3. The actual value and the estimation of acceleration in x and y directions and corresponding RMS errors
by the proposed method compared with the augmented methods.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 9, SEPTEMBER 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617
https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 89
2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617
10 15 20 25
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
time (sec)
j
x
(
m
/
s
e
c
3
)
Atcual jerk
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
j
x
(
m
/
s
e
c
3
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
10 15 20 25
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
time (sec)
j
y
(
m
/
s
e
c
3
)
Atcual jerk
OPSKE method estimation
AUSKE method estimation
10 15 20 25
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
time (sec)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
R
M
S
E
o
f
j
y
(
m
/
s
e
c
3
)
OPSKE
AUSKE
Fig. 4. The actual value and the estimation of jerk parameters and RMS errors by the OPSKE method compared
with the AUSKE method.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 9, SEPTEMBER 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617
https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 90
2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617
It is clear that the performance of the proposed
OPSKE is as well as the results obtained by the
AUSKE in the maneuvering target tracking problem.
Note that in this example
4 = n
,
4 = m
and
2 = p
, and
the operation savings for the OPSKE over the AUSKE
and the OTSKE as shown in Table 3 are 1340 (or
35.7%) and 592 (or 15.7%), respectively.
IV. CONCLUSION
In this article, we introduce Cloud Computing and
perusal about influences of it on the processes of these
days. Although creating a Cloud Computing
architecture that is scalable and is usable for sharing
all kind of resources, has so many problem and
complexions, but it can be usable for optimization and
removing all IT requirements. These days lots of
technologies migrate from traditional systems into
cloud, and cloud computing has developed and used in
so many countries. These countries are using cloud
computing in many of industries with different
applications and also the range of using cloud
computing is increasing in different countries and with
different applications.
Although, there is some worry about security in cloud
computing, but the number of persons that save their
personal information in servers of third company for
example Google, is increasing. We presented some
solutions for improving its security. With regard to lots
of cloud computing advantages, specially, costs
reduction of implementation in large scale, investing
capital is increasing in this filed. Cloud Computing is
advancing with fast rate and also it will be complete
with little deficiencies rather than other technologies.
It is predict that Cloud computing is the basic platform
for IT in next 20 year [16].
References
[1] David C. Wyld; the cloudy future of government
IT: cloud computing and the public sector around
the world, IJWesT, Vol. 1, Num. 1, Jan. 2010.
[2] Jean-Daniel Cryans, Alain April, Alain Abran;
criteria to compare cloud computing with current
database technology, R. Dumke et al. (Eds.):
IWSM / MetriKon / Mensura 2008, LNCS 5338,
pp. 114-126, 2008.
[3] Mehdi Darbandi; Involving Kalman filter
technique for increasing the reliability and
efficiency of cloud computing; WORLD
COMPETITION 2012; Los Vegas, USA.
[4] Harold C. Lim, Shivnath Babu, Jeffrey S. Chase,
Sujay S. Parekh; automated control in cloud
computing: challenges and opportunities,
ACDC09, June 19, Barcelona, Spain.
[5] N. Sainath, S. Muralikrishna, P.V.S. Srinivas; a
framework of cloud computing in the real world;
Advances in Computational Sciences and
Technology, ISSN 0973-6107, Vol. 3, Num. 2,
(2010), pp. 175-190.
[6] Kyle Chard, Simon Caton, Omer Rana, Kris
Bubendorfer; social cloud: cloud computing in
social networks
[7] G. Bruce Berriman, Eva Deelman, Paul Groth,
Gideon Juve; the application of cloud computing
to the creation of image mosaics and management
of their provenance,
[8] Roy Campbell, Indranil Gupta, Michael Heath,
Steven Y. Ko, Michael Kozuch, Marcel Kunze,
Thomas Kwan, Kevin Lai, Hing Yan Lee, Martha
Lyons, Dejan Milojicic, David OHallaron, Yeng
Chai Soh; open cirrus TM cloud computing
testbed: federated data centers for open source
systems and services research
[9] Rajkumar Buyya, Chee Shin Yeo, Srikumar
Venugopal, James Broberg, Ivona Brandic;
cloud computing and Emerging IT platforms:
Vision, Hype, and Reality for delivering computing
as the 5th utility
[10] Lamia Youseff, Maria Butrico, Dilma Da Silva;
toward a unified ontology of cloud computing
[11] Daniel A. Menasce, Paul Ngo; understanding
cloud computing: experimentation and capacity
planning; Proc. 2009, Computer Measurement
Group Conf. Dallas, TX. Dec. 2009.
[12] Won Kim; cloud computing: today and
tomorrow; JOT, Vol. 8, No. 1, Jan-Feb 2009.
[13] Richard Chow, philippe Golle, Markus Jakobsson,
Elaine Shi, Jessica Staddon, Ryusuke Masuoka,
Jesus Molina; controlling data in the cloud:
outsourcing computation without outsourcing
control; CCSW09, Nov. 13, 2009, Chicago,
Illinois, USA.
[14] Bo Peng, Bin Cui, Xiaoming Li; implementation
issues of a cloud computing platform; Bulletin of
the IEEE computer society technical committee on
data engineering.
[15] Daniel Nurmi, Rich Wolski, Chris Grzegorczyk,
Graziano Obertelli, Sunil Soman, Lamia Youseff,
Dmitrii Zagorodnov; the eucalyptus open-source
cloud computing system.
[16] Mehdi Darbandi, Hoda Purhosein; Perusal
about influences of Cloud Computing on the
processes of these days and presenting new ideas
about its security, Int. IEEE Conf. Azerbaijan,
Bakku.
Mohammad Abedi: MSc student in
Iran University of Science and
Technology (IUST); Tehran, Iran.
Mehdi Darbandi: MSc student in
Iran University of Science and
Technology (IUST); Tehran, Iran.
Mohsen Kariman Khorasani:
Department of Communication
Engineering, Islamic Azad University,
Gonabad Branch, Gonabad, Iran.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 9, SEPTEMBER 2012, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617
https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 91
2012 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617