Evolution of Computer Technology in Last 25 Years

Evolution of Computer Technology in Last 25 Years The advancement of the computing technology could commonly identify in 6 generations. The physical size of the computers significantly decreased from the first generation vacuum tube computers to third generation computers based on the integrated chip technology. Fourth and fifth generation computer technology increased computer chips efficiency by developing the very large scale integration (VLSI) and ultra large scale integration (ULSI) technology. (Halya, 1999) During the fifth generation computing, the idea of using multiple computer chips to solve the same problem flourished, which was based on the earlier design of parallel computing that was developed during the fourth generation. With the improvement of hardware, increased network bandwidth, and developing more efficient algorithms, massively parallel architectures allowed fifth generation computers to increase the efficiency of computing significantly. (Drako, 1994) This research paper is mainly going to discuss how the comp uter technology evolved from the end of the fifth generation to current day sixth generation computers. The improvement in microprocessor chips technology allowed millions of transistors to be placed on a single integrated chip, which opened the generation of computers based on ultra large scale integration, or ULSI. The 64-bit microprocessor was developed during this time and became the fifth generation chip we mostly use today. Even the older fourth-generation chip architecture concepts like Reduced Instruction Set Computers (RISC) and Complex Instruction Set Computers (CISC) derived the benefit of ULSI technology. During the fourth generation period, microprocessors were commonly classified into RISC or CISC type architectures. The difference between RISC and CISC were very clearly distinguishable. RISC has a very simple set of instructions which required a low number of transistors but needed a higher memory to do a task. CISC has more instructions set available compared to RISC which required more transistors but less memory space. (Hennessy, 1991) Due to the limited computing res ources, each programmer decided the specific chip type to deliver the endstate the application delivery. However, with the advancement of microprocessors, the 64-bit chip now has more transistors and memory address access available for computing. Today, the need of differentiating what used to be two main categories of the microprocessor is almost pointless because of the level of complexity in modern day 64-bit chips for both CISC and RISC. Many new CISC chips behave like RISC with the increased processor clock cycle while the new RISC has increased number of instructions available like CISC (Cole, 2015). Two of the most important hardware techniques used to improve performance during the fourth and fifth generation of computer development have been pipelining and caches. Both techniques rely on using more devices to achieve higher performance. Pipelining might have been available only to some mainframe computers and supercomputers during fourth generation computing; however, the technique became very common within computer architecture during the fifth generation computing which became the baseline for the sixth generation computer which uses decentralized computing process to perform as an artificial intelligence and neural network computing. Pipelining improves the throughput of a machine without changing the basic cycle time and increases performance by exploiting instruction-level parallelism. (Hennessey, 1991) Instruction-level parallelism is available when instructions in a sequence are independent and thus can be executed in parallel by overlapping. Unarguably, the pipelining technology led to faster speeds and better performances but the hardware performance couldnt keep up with the demand of even faster hardware that could facilitate applications that required processing a large amount of data or critical commercial transaction very fast. Addition to advances in pipelining, the advancement in cache memory technology also significantly enhanced performance of how computer access data. By creating a small pool of memory either in the actual processor or very close to it decreased the need of frequent access of data directly from the memory. This technique made cache memories one of the most important ideas in computer architecture. (Uri, 2010) Cache memories substantially improved performance by the use of memory. Cache memories were first used in the third-generation computers from the late 60s and early 70s, both in large machines and minicomputer. From the fourth-generation and on, virtually every microprocessor has included support for a cache. Although large caches can certainly improve performance, total cache size, associativity, and block size all directly impact the performance and have optimal values that depend on the details of a design. (Hennessey, 1991) Just like microprocessor and pipelining, the cache technology improved significantly last two decades. Traditional cache architectures are demand fetch, cache lines are only brought into the cache when they are explicitly required by the process. Prefetching increased the efficiency of this process by anticipating that some memory will be used near future, thus, proactively fetched into the cache. Earlier of prefetching was either done through software or hard ware prefetching. As the complexity of prefetching increases, some more recent research has looked at combining the imprecise future knowledge available to the compiler with the detailed run-time information available to hardware like programmable prefetching engine consisting of a run-ahead table that populates using explicit software instruction. (Srinivasan, 2011) With such advancement in core computer technologies, the ability to process data and store information truly became increasingly decentralized. From cloud to PC over IP technology, cheaper storage, faster processor, and higher bandwidth wide area network allowed the modern day computer to work in collaboration rather than isolation. If from the first generation to the fifth generation focused on improving the efficiency of the hardware to meet demands of software engineers, the current sixth generation is more about how human interacts with the computers to enrich human lives. Computers became smaller while still sufficient to process necessary application by itself or using servers through the internetwork. Everything has become smarter, faster, smaller, and connected. With the improved network and parallel computing, the sixth generation computers definitely getting closer to simulate how the human brain functions. Using basic algorithms, probability and statistic, and economic the ories, new computer technology could simulate human-like decision-making process to improve human lives and help to solve more complex issues. In the sixth generation, we are actually experiencing the true potential of commercial Artificial Intelligence. References Cole, Bernard, (2015). New CISC Architecture Takes on RISC. EE Times, Retrieved from http://www.eetimes.com Drako, Nikos, (1995) . An Overview Of Computational Science. The Computational Science Education Project Haldya, Micky, (1999). Computer Architecture. Biyanis Think Tanks; Chap 5, 26 27 Hennessy, John L. Jouppi,Norman P., (1991). Computer Technology and Architecture: An Evolving Interaction.Computer, vol. 24, no., 18 29 Srinivasan, James R., (2011). Improving Cache Utilization. Technical Report; no 800., 31 35 Uri, Cohen, (2010). From Caching to Space-based Architecture: The Evolution of Memory. Enterprise System Journal. Retrieved from https://esj.com/

Physics Cantilever Lab

Independent Assessment Physics Lab (SL): Cantilever Flexion Cherno Okafor Mr. Ebrahimi SPH4U7 October 21st, 2012 Introduction Purpose: The purpose of this Physics Lab is to investigate what factors determine the amount of flexion of the cantilever. Hence, the objective is to establish a relationship between the length of a cantilever, which may give some insight into the physics of cantilevers. Hypothesis: If one increases the length of a cantilever, one would expect there to be an increase in deflection/flexion of the cantilever.Similarly, if one increases the mass of the load, one would expect there to be an increase in the deflexion/flexion of the cantilever. In addition, I predict that proportionality will also occur between the independent and dependent variables. If the length of the cantilever doubles, it is expected that the flexion/deflexion would also double. Similarly, if the mass of the load doubles, the deflexion/flexion would also double. Variables: In this investigatio n, I chose two variables: the length of the cantilever and the mass of the load.First, I chose to measure the effect of the length of the cantilever on its deflection when loaded with a constant mass because I knew from prior experience that there was some relationship between the two variables. * Independent Variable: The length of the cantilever in metres, which will be varied by changing the length of the yardstick functioning as a cantilever that extends over the edge of a table. This will be measured indirectly by measuring the length of the portion of the yardstick not in use and subtracting that from the entire length of the yardstick.The other independent variable is the mass loaded onto the cantilever, which will be controlled by initially using the same mass for each trial, then for the second part, changing the mass of the load by increasing and decreasing the mass, and subsequently investigating what the relationship is between load mass and cantilever length. The initia l location of the mass in relation to the entire yardstick will be controlled by placing the mass at the same end of the yardstick for each trial and marking the flexion/deflexion. Dependent Variable: The deflection/flexion of the cantilever in metres. This will be measured indirectly by measuring the initial height of the bottom of the cantilever with no mass added (which is equal to the height of the table) and the new height of the bottom of the cantilever after each trial, which will be measured with mass added. Hence, the difference between these heights is equal to the deflection/flexion of the cantilever. The material and other physical properties of the cantilever will be controlled by using the same yardstick as a cantilever for each trial.Data Collection and Processing My experiment is divided into two parts; experiment A (involving the relationship between flexion and the mass of the load) and experiment B (involving the relationship between the flexion and the length of the cantilever). Below are two tables in which I have recorded the data which I obtained during the experiment. The first table reflects the Relationship between the deflection/flexion of the cantilever and the mass of the load and the second table reflects the relationship between the flexion of the cantilever and the length of the cantilever. i) Relationship between the deflection/flexion of the cantilever and the load mass (5 trials) Table #1-Experiment A Factor/Variable| Trial 1| Trial 2| Trial 3| Trial 4| Trial 5| Trial 6| Trial 7| Trial 8| Trial 9| Trial 10| Trial 11| Load (g)| 0| 100| 200| 300| 400| 500| 600| 700| 800| 900| 1000| Without Load (cm)| 96| 96| 96| 96| 96| 96| 96| 96| 96| 96| 96| With Load (cm)| 96| 92. 7| 90| 87. 6| 85| 82. 2| 79. 5| 77| 74. 6| 71. 5| 69. 5| Flexion (cm)| 0| 3. 3| 6| 8. 4| 11| 13. 8| 16. 5| 19| 21. 4| 24. 5| 26. 5| Now, I will graph this relation:We can see that there is a linear relationship between flexion and the load mass. (ii) Relationship b etween the deflection/flexion and the length of the cantilever (5 trials) Table #2- Experiment B Factor/Variable| Trial 1| Trial 2| Trial 3| Trial 4| Trial 5| Trial 6| Trial 7| Trial 8| Trial 9| Trial 10| Length of cantilever (cm)| 90| 80| 70| 60| 50| 40| 30| 20| 10| 0| Height without Load (cm)| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| 95. 5| Height with Load (cm)| 69. 5| 76. 5| 82. 5| 87. 4| 90. 9| 93. 2| 94. 5| 95. 5| 95. | 95. 5| Flexion (cm)| 26| 19| 13| 8. 1| 4. 6| 2. 3| 1| 0| 0| 0| Now I will graph this relation: We can see that there is an exponential/power relationship (curved) between the flexion and the cantilever length. Analyzing Evidence Patterns: 1) In experiment A, the relationship between the flexion and the load is proportional as predicted. As the load increases, the flexion increases as well. As the load doubles from 200g to 400g, the deflection almost doubles too. 2) In experiment B, the deflection increases as the length of the cantilever i ncreases.But this time, it reaches a point (20cm, 10cm, 0cm) where the deflection stays the same even if the cantilever length changes. Conclusion and Evaluation Conclusion: The experimental results agree with my prediction/hypothesis because I predicted that in experiment A, the deflection is proportional to the mass of the load. In experiment B, I predicted that flexion/deflexion would increase as the length of the cantilever increases. As the load and the length of the cantilever increases, then the deflection/flexion increases.This happens because of forces acting on the particles in the cantilever. At the top of the cantilever, particles are pulled apart proportionately to the load because they are in tension. The forces between particles increase. However, the attractive force is bigger than the repelling force in the particles so therefore, the particles are held together. The particles at the bottom will be pushed together proportionately to the load because they are in comp ression. The forces get larger and the repelling force which is bigger pushes the particles away from each other.So they are not disordered. We can also say that they obey Hooke’s law. Evaluation: From the results that I got after performing the experiment, I can say that the experiment worked quite well. In the analyzing evidence section, I can draw the conclusion that the first table reflects a linear straight line graph and the second table reflects a curved graph. On this basis, I can say that the experiment worked out pretty well. I think the data I obtained was accurate since I did indeed try to graph these relationships.A possible improvement to this experiment should be repeating the experiment twice or more if possible. Then I would get the average results in a table and in this way, my results would be even more accurate. General Conclusion: The general conclusion we can draw from this experiment is that as the mass that we put on the cantilever increases, the defle ction increases too until the elastic point is reached where the cantilever cannot hold any more masses so it breaks. Also, we can see from the second graph that the larger the length of the cantilever, the large the flexion is.

A Personal Perspective

Week 3 Hand-in Assignment A tablet computer, or simply tablet, is a mobile computer with display circuitry and battery in a single unit. Tablets are equipped with sensors, including cameras, microphone, accelerometer and touch screen, with finger or stylus gestures replacing computer mouse and keyboard. The tablet computer and he associated special operating software is an example of pen computing technology. The first patent for a system that recognized handwritten characters by analyzing the handwriting motion was granted In 1915. In 1987. Apple computer started Its tablet project.In 2000 Microsoft coined the term Microsoft Tablet Pc for tablet Pc s built to Microsoft specification. In 2010 Apple introduce the IPad. The IPad has been characterized by some as a tablet computer that mainly focuses on videos, photos, presentation, and Microsoft Office-compatible software for word processing. The iOS 5 was released in October 2011. Samsung Galaxy Tab was also released in September 2010 . Over 80 new tablets were announced to compete with the IPad In January 2011. Companies who announced tablets included: Samsung with a new Galaxy Tab (android 2. ), Motorola with its xoom Tablet (android3. O) Research in motion demonstrating their blackberry playbook, Toshiba with the android 3. 0, Vizio with the tablet and others including Asus, and the startup Company Notion Ink. Many of these tablets are designed to run android 3. 0 honeycomb. An electronic calculator is a small, portable, often inexpensive electronic device used to perform both basic and complex operations of arithmetic, The first known tool used to ald arithmetic alculations was the Abacus, devised by Sumerians and Egyptians before 2000 BC.Computer operating systems as far back as early Unix have included interactive calculator programs such as dc and hoc, and calculator functions are included in almost all PDA-type devices (save a few dedicated address book and dictionary devices). Modern electronic calculato rs contain a keyboard with buttons for digits and arithmetical operations. Some even contain 00 and 000 buttons to make large numbers easier to enter. Most basic calculators assign only one dlglt or operation on each button.However, in more specific calculators, a button can perform multi- function working with key combination or current reckoning mode. In most countries, students use calculators for schoolwork and even financial institutions for caculating money e. g the bank etc . To conclude these systems are different than the systems am currently using today, taking the Tablet for instance we have got lots of brands now and operating systems with Interesting and educative apps .

Definition and Examples of Baby Talk

Baby talk refers to the simple language forms used by young children, or the modified form of speech often used by adults with young children. Also known as motherese or caregiver speech. Early research talked of motherese, notes Jean Aitchison. This left out fathers and friends, so caretaker speech became the fashionable term, later amended to caregiver speech, and in academic publications, to CDS child-directed speech Examples and Observations Eloise Robinson and John Redhead Froome, Jr. As I mounted the porch steps I could hear Miss Altheas voice through the open window. She was apparently, I regret to say, speaking to Mabel, for her words had a soft, cooing sound and were such that, were it not for the sake of veracity, I should be inclined to omit them. Is muvvers ittle cutey takin its ittle beauty nap after its din-din? Did it like its din-din? Good din-din with chicken in it for ittle cutey baby! Thats right, take its ittle beauty nap till its muvver turns down. She wont be long--wont be long! Muvvers ittle sleepin beauty, ittle cutey beauty! There was more of the same or a similar, variety to which my decisive ring at the door-bell put a hasty end. –Dead Dog, 1918 Lawrence Balter Linguists who have studied the structure of baby talk words have pointed out that there are some typical sound change rules that relate the baby talk word to its adult equivalent. For instance, reduction of the word to a shorter form is common, as is reduplication of the short form, hence, words such as din din and bye bye. It is not clear, however, how some baby talk words were derived: no simple rule explains how rabbits turned into bunnies.Although there is a traditional baby talk vocabulary, almost any word in English can be turned into a baby talk word by the addition of a diminutive ending, -ie: foot becomes footie, shirt becomes shirtie, and so forth. These diminutive endings convey affectionate as well as size connotations. –Parenthood in America., 2000 Sara Thorne Baby words like doggie or moo-cow do not help a child to learn language more efficiently. The reduplication of sounds in words like baba and dada, on the other hand, does enable babies to communicate because the words are easy to say. –Mastering Advanced English Language, 2008 Charles A. Ferguson [T]he reduplication in baby talk is generally separate and unrelated to the use in the normal language. Reduplication can probably be regarded as a feature of baby talk throughout the world. –Baby Talk in Six Languages, 1996 J. Madeleine Nash When speaking to babies, Stanford University psychologist Anne Fernald has found, mothers and fathers from many cultures change their speech patterns in the same peculiar ways. They put their faces very close to the child, she reports. They use shorter utterances, and they speak in an unusually melodious fashion. –Fertile Minds, 1997 Jean Aitchison Caregiver speech can be odd. Some parents are more concerned with truth than with language. The ill-formed Daddy hat on might meet with approval, Yes, thats right, if daddy was wearing a hat. But the well-formed Daddys got a hat on might meet with disapproval, No, thats wrong, if daddy wasnt wearing a hat. You might expect children to grow up telling the truth, but speaking ungrammatically, as some early researchers pointed out. In fact, the opposite happens. –The Language Web: The Power and Problem of Words, 1997 Debra L. Roter and Judith A. Hall Caporael (1981) focused on the use of displaced baby talk to the institutionalized elderly. Baby talk is a simplified speech pattern with distinctive paralinguistic features of high pitch and exaggerated intonation contour that is usually associated with speech to young children. More than 22% of speech to residents in one nursing home was identified as baby talk. Further, even talk from caregivers to the elderly that was not identified as baby talk was more likely to be judged as directed toward a child than was talk between caregivers. The investigators concluded that this phenomenon is widespread and that baby talk directed toward elderly adults was not a result of fine tuning of speech to individual needs or characteristics of a particular patient, but rather a function of social stereotyping of the elderly. –Doctors Talking With Patients/Patients Talking With Doctors, 2006 Topher Grace (as Eric) You know, mom, there comes an age in a boys life when the baby talk stops working. Yeah, when it does, it just gives a boy the urge to kill. –That 70s Show, 2006