EVALUATION METHOD FOR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION LEAK ABOUT DEFENSE SYSTEM FUNCTIONING FOR INFORMATIZATION OBJECT ON INFORMATION CRITERIA

This paper studies a new network information security system and its evaluation method based on the security threat situation network security model. This paper expounds the application of active defense system and passive defense system in network security, and uses advanced technical support platform and network security model. In this paper, the active defense system and the passive defense system are organically combined to form a new model of computer network security with characteristics. At the same time, based on the idea of security threat situation evaluation, this paper extends the traditional PDRR security model and proposes a network active defense security model and defense in depth security strategy. On this basis, a hybrid architecture of active and passive defense is proposed. The architecture integrates some new network active defense technologies, and constructs a comprehensive and deep network defense system together with network passive defense means. The experimental results show that the proposed defense model improves the security defense efficiency and effective defense rate of the traditional PDRR security model.

Download Full-text

Evaluation method for imaging plate resolution by means of phase contrast transfer function

Proceedings, annual meeting, Electron Microscopy Society of America ◽

10.1017/s0424820100139688 ◽

1995 ◽

Vol 53 ◽

pp. 662-663 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

T. Oikawa ◽

H. Kosugi ◽

F. Hosokawa ◽

D. Shindo ◽

M. Kersker

Keyword(s):

Transfer Function ◽

Phase Contrast ◽

Evaluation Method ◽

Amorphous Film ◽

Imaging Plate ◽

X Rays ◽

Special Shape ◽

Contrast Transfer Function ◽

Contrast Image ◽

Specimen Shape

Evaluation of the resolution of the Imaging Plate (IP) has been attempted by some methods. An evaluation method for IP resolution, which is not influenced by hard X-rays at higher accelerating voltages, was proposed previously by the present authors. This method, however, requires truoblesome experimental preperations partly because specially synthesized hematite was used as a specimen, and partly because a special shape of the specimen was used as a standard image. In this paper, a convenient evaluation method which is not infuenced by the specimen shape and image direction, is newly proposed. In this method, phase contrast images of thin amorphous film are used.Several diffraction rings are obtained by the Fourier transformation of a phase contrast image of thin amorphous film, taken at a large under focus. The rings show the spatial-frequency spectrum corresponding to the phase contrast transfer function (PCTF). The envelope function is obtained by connecting the peak intensities of the rings. The evelope function is offten used for evaluation of the instrument, because the function shows the performance of the electron microscope (EM).

Download Full-text

Combining Values

Guides Newsletter ◽

10.1001/amaguidesnewsletters.2002.marapr01 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 1-4, 12 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Christopher R. Brigham

Keyword(s):

Lower Extremity ◽

Upper Extremity ◽

Evaluation Method ◽

Proximal Phalanx ◽

Common Error ◽

The Third ◽

Whole Person ◽

Impairment Ratings ◽

Upper Extremity Impairment ◽

The Individual

Abstract To account for the effects of multiple impairments, evaluating physicians must provide a summary value that combines multiple impairments so the whole person impairment is equal to or less than the sum of all the individual impairment values. A common error is to add values that should be combined and typically results in an inflated rating. The Combined Values Chart in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition, includes instructions that guide physicians about combining impairment ratings. For example, impairment values within a region generally are combined and converted to a whole person permanent impairment before combination with the results from other regions (exceptions include certain impairments of the spine and extremities). When they combine three or more values, physicians should select and combine the two lowest values; this value is combined with the third value to yield the total value. Upper extremity impairment ratings are combined based on the principle that a second and each succeeding impairment applies not to the whole unit (eg, whole finger) but only to the part that remains (eg, proximal phalanx). Physicians who combine lower extremity impairments usually use only one evaluation method, but, if more than one method is used, the physician should use the Combined Values Chart.

Download Full-text