Difference between revisions of "Final Report 2011"

From Derek
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Budget)
(→‎Risk Management)
Line 383: Line 383:
 
{| border="1" cellspacing="0" style="text-align:center; margin: 1em auto 1em auto"
 
{| border="1" cellspacing="0" style="text-align:center; margin: 1em auto 1em auto"
 
|- style="color:white; background:#191970; font-weight:bold"
 
|- style="color:white; background:#191970; font-weight:bold"
−
| width="220" | Risk || width="160" | Risk Estimation
+
| width="220" | Risk || width="160" | Risk Estimation || width="300" | Reduction Strategy
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
| colspan="4" | Physical Hazards
 
| colspan="4" | Physical Hazards
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | External construction noise || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | External construction noise || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | Falls within laboratory || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | Falls within laboratory || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | Injuries due to electrical shock || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | Injuries due to electrical shock || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
| colspan="4" | Chemical Hazards
 
| colspan="4" | Chemical Hazards
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | None || -  
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | None || - || -
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
| colspan="4" | Biological Hazards
 
| colspan="4" | Biological Hazards
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | None || -  
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | None || - || -
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
| colspan="4" | Ergonomic Hazards
 
| colspan="4" | Ergonomic Hazards
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | Work place layout || style="background:#00FF00" | Low  
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | Work place layout || style="background:#00FF00" | Low  
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
| colspan="4" | Radiation Hazards
 
| colspan="4" | Radiation Hazards
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | None || -  
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | None || - || -
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
|- style="background:#DCDCDC; font-weight:bold; text-align:left"
 
| colspan="4" | Psychological Hazards
 
| colspan="4" | Psychological Hazards
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | Work related stress || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium  
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | Work related stress || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium  
 
|-
 
|-
−
| style="text-align:left" | Repetitive tasks || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium  
+
| style="color:white; text-align:left; background:#4682B4" | Repetitive tasks || style="background:#FFFF00" | Medium  
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}

Revision as of 23:04, 22 October 2011

Under Construction

Construction Notespace:

  • Due to be finished 23/10/11 11:59pm
  • Following structure is according to my report (mostly) so if the content you're uploading isn't consistent with the title just change the title.
    • questions.. Project Outcomes before/after Management

Executive Summary

Introduction

History

The Case

The Code

The code found in the back of the Rubaiyat linked to the Somerton Man.

Technological Progress

Previous Studies

Project Objectives

At the beginning of the project several broad objectives were established. These were:

  1. Comprehensive Cipher Analysis
  2. Create an ability to custom search the web

In the Comprehensive Cipher Analysis section the aim is to examine as many ciphers as possible and determine if each cipher can be ruled out as being used in encrypting the Somerton Man Code. This process intends to contribute to the ongoing cipher examination of the code.

The second objective aims at creating the ability to custom search and analyse the vast amounts of data available on the web that provides greater control than the average internet search engine. The reasoning behind this is the theory that with the amount of data available on the web, the true meaning of the code could already be written somewhere. Thus by exhaustively searching for distinct patterns evident in the code it may be possible to directly identify parts of the underlying message. This objective also includes the design aim of making the software flexible in that it could accept many different search patterns; providing applications beyond the scope of the Somerton Man investigation.

It should be noted that the project does not set the objectives of cracking the code nor solving the case. The code has not been solved in over 6 decades of attempts, so while the project does hope to shed some light on the meaning behind the code; the success of the project does not hinge on the code being cracked or the case being solved.

Extended Objectives

Group meetings throughout the course of the project identified areas on which the project objectives could be extended.

In the Cipher Analysis section a lot of software was being written for the process of investigating cipher links to the code. Rather than archive this software after each cipher was examined, an objective was set to utilise it by creating a centralised cipher analysis tool intuitively implementing numerous ciphers.

With the aim of designing web search software with numerous applications a need for a user-friendly interface was identified. This spawned the objective of creating an interactive user-friendly GUI from which to run the search mechanism from and present results through.

Finally, with these useful software applications, the goal was set to release them to the public by making them available on the project's wiki page.

Structure of Remainder of Report

Background Theory

Cipher Analysis

Web Crawler

Structural and Statistical Investigation

Concept

Given the fact the code was found in the back of the book of poems, Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, there remains suspicion that the code is somehow linked to the contents of the Rubaiyat. If this were the case, a cipher analysis may not even be necessary. This theory has been investigated by testing three hypotheses through statistically and structurally analysing the poems in the Rubaiyat.

Hypotheses

  1. The code is an initialism of a poem in the Rubaiyat
    • Based on previous studies indicating an English initialism and the fact the code has four (un-crossed out) lines, with each poem being a quatrain (four line poem).
  2. The code is related to the initial letters of each word, line or poem
    • Based on previous studies indicating an English initialism.
  3. The code is generally related to text in the Rubaiyat
    • Based on the links between the Rubaiyat and the code.

Technical Challenges

The two main challenges in this analysis revolve around the source material.

  1. Code Ambiguities
  2. Sample Size

Code ambiguities refer to difficulties in determining which letters some of the handwritten symbols in the code represent; a challenge created by the untidy handwriting. Sample Size refers to the issues encountered due to the limited sample of 44 letters we have to analyse from the code.

Design of Tests

The approach to testing these hypotheses varied, although each used Java text parsing and statistic-gathering code. The first hypothesis was tested through statistically analysing the structure of the Rubaiyat poems and comparing to the Somerton Man code structure. The second and third hypotheses were tested through analysing letter frequencies in the poems using software and comparing these results to Somerton Man code letter frequencies. In the case of Hypothesis 2 frequency data was gathered on the first letter of each poem, the first letter of each line and the initial letter of each word. The third hypothesis similarly analysed letter frequencies of all letters in the Rubaiyat.

Results of Tests

Hypothesis 1: The code is an initialism of a poem. Statistics were gathered on the number of words in each line (first, second, third, fourth) of each poem. The statistics gathered include the mean number of words in each line, the standard deviation, the maximum number of words in a line and the minimum. The results categorized by line number in a Rubaiyat poem are shown in the table below, followed by the statistics from the Somerton Man’s code.

Table 1: Letters per Line in Rubaiyat Poems
Line Mean Std Dev Max Min
First 8.00 1.15 10 5
Second 7.69 1.20 10 5
Third 7.88 1.06 10 5
Fourth 7.87 1.31 10 5
Table 2: Letters per Line in Code
Line Number of Letters
First 9
Second 11
Third 11
Fourth 13

The important result is the maximum number of words in the poem lines. Each line category has a maximum number of words of 10 across all of the 75 poems contained in the Rubaiyat. However, the code has 11, 11 and 13 letters in its second, third and fourth lines respectively, each over the maximum. These results allow Hypothesis 1 to be ruled out, giving the conclusion that the code is not an initialism of a Rubaiyat poem.

Hypothesis 2: The code is related to the initial letters of each word, line or poem. Letter frequency data was gathered on the first letter of each poem, of each line and of each word. This data is plotted against average English initial frequencies and the code letter distribution.

All, Line and Poem Initials

A link between poem initials or line initials and the code can be trivially ruled out. There is a ‘G’ in the code but no line or poem starts with a ‘G’ in the entire Rubaiyat. A link between all initial letters in the Rubaiyat and the code is more difficult to rule out. There is a generally good correlation between English initials and initials in the Rubaiyat (graphed in light blue) as might be expected, but there are significant discrepancies when compared to the code, such as the code clearly having a greater proportion of A’s, B’s and M’s. While a link cannot be ruled out due to the small sample size of the code (44 letters), for the purposes of this project a link has been ruled unlikely.

Hypothesis 3: The code is generally related to the text in the Rubaiyat. This hypothesis was tested by adapting the Java text parser code to generate letter frequency plots for the all letters in the Rubaiyat poems. The results are displayed in the graph below.

All initials

While there is very good correlation between the Rubaiyat poems and English text, the letter frequency of the code is substantially different, with significantly larger proportions of M’s, A’s and B’s. Again the sample size of 44 letters for the code restricts our ability to make a conclusion, but for our purposes there is enough evidence to discount a link.

Conclusions

The rejection of these three hypotheses indicates there is no direct (unencrypted) link between the code and the Rubaiyat, disregarding the weaknesses surrounding the assumptions required with ambiguous letters and the small sample size. This result, combined with the 2009 and 2010 results indicating the code was not random[1][2], led to the conclusion that the project did require a comprehensive cipher analysis. It should be noted that this conclusion doesn’t rule out all links between the code and the Rubaiyat; just unencrypted links.

Cipher Investigation

Concept

Previous Work

Technical Challenges

Methodology

Results

Cipher Test techniques Status Student
ADFGVX Structural analysis Disproven Steven
Affine Direct decryption Disproven Patrick
Alphabet reversal Direct decryption Disproven Patick
Auto-key Direct decryption Disproven Steven
Baconian Structural analysis Disproven Patick
Beaufort Frequency analysis Unlikely Steven
Bifid Frequency analysis Disproven Steven
Book Structural analysis Disproven Patrick
Dvorak encoding Direct decryption Disproven Patrick
Flat-frequency Statistical analysis Disproven Patrick
Four square Structural analysis Unlikely Patrick
Gronsfeld Structural analysis Disproven Steven
Hill Frequency analysis Disproven Steven
Homophonic substitution Structural analysis, Statistical analysis Disproven Patrick
Keyword Frequency analysis Possible Patrick
Nihilist Structural analysis Disproven Steven
Null Structural analysis Unlikely Patrick
Number based Structural analysis Disproven Patrick
One time pad Statistical analysis Unlikely Patrick
Pigpen Direct decryption Disproven Patrick
Playfair Structural analysis Disproven Patrick
Playfair (Double) Frequency analysis Unlikely Steven
Porta Frequency analysis Unlikely Steven
Rail fence Direct decryption Disproven Patrick
Shift Direct decryption Disproven Steven
Templar Direct decryption Disproven Steven
Trifid Frequency analysis Unlikely Steven
Trithemius Direct decryption Disproven Steven
Two square Structural analysis Unlikely Patrick
VIC Structural analysis Disproven Steven
Vigenere Frequency analysis Unlikely Steven

CipherGUI

Concept

Technical Challenges

Design

Implementation

Testing

Pattern Matcher

Concept

Previous Work

Technical Challenges

Design

Implementation

Testing

Web Crawler

Concept

Previous Work

Technical Challenges

Design

Implementation

Testing

System Integration

Concept

Previous Work

Technical Challenges

Design

Implementation

Testing

Web Crawler Investigation

Concept

Technical Challenges

Design

Results

Future Development

Cipher Analysis

Web Crawler

Project Management

Timeline

Gantt Chart as of 22/10/2011

Table 5: Milestones
Milestone Description Due Met Status
Cipher and Structural Investigations
Analysis of Rubaiyat Report on Rubaiyat links complete 08/08/11 01/06/11 Completed ahead of schedule
Cipher Identification Cipher List compiled 10/04/11 17/03/11 Completed ahead of schedule
Cipher Investigation Cipher List fully investigated 16/08/11 30/08/11 Completed behind schedule
(Extension) CipherGUI Passes final tests 01/10/11 26/10/11 Completed ahead of schedule
Web Crawler Development
Pattern Matcher module PM successfully detects patterns and returns results 08/08/11 15/07/11 Completed ahead of schedule
Web Crawler module WC self-navigates the web 08/08/11 08/08/11 Completed on schedule
System Integration Software retrieves web pages and matches patterns 17/09/11 17/09/11 Completed on schedule
(Extension) GUI complete Able to run searches and view results from GUI 25/09/11 27/09/11 Completed behind schedule
Project Management
Proposal Seminar Proposal Seminar presented 18/03/11 18/03/11 Completed on schedule
Stage 1 Progress Report S1PR submitted 01/04/11 01/04/11 Completed on schedule
Stage 2 Progress Report S2PR submitted 03/06/11 03/06/11 Completed on schedule
Final Presentation Presentation presented with demonstration 30/09/11 30/09/11 Completed on schedule
Final Report Final Report handed over 21/10/11 21/10/11 Completed on schedule
Project Exhibition and Poster Poster complete and Exhibition given 28/10/11 28/10/11 Progress on schedule
Project Video Video complete and uploaded to YouTube 28/10/11 28/10/11 Progress on schedule
Handover Products and results handed over to EEE School 28/10/11 28/10/11 Progress on schedule

Role Allocation

During the planning phase of the project, a workload allocation plan was specified, recognising that while some areas could be worked on equally, there were distinct advantages in individual team members focusing on specialty areas. A graphical illustration of allocations is shown in the figure below, with reasoning provided underneath.

Contribution of each member towards project

The review and research of previous work was split equally since each project member needed to have a good understanding of the entire project and its status. The workload in the Cipher Analysis section (including the CipherGUI) was also equally shared. This was due to the compartmentalised nature of the cipher investigation; individual ciphers were all separate investigations so there was no major advantage in specialising.

Recognising the complexity and distinct segments of the web crawler application, the development of the pattern matching and web crawler modules were assigned to Patrick and Steven respectively. The reasoning behind this was Patrick’s previous experience in active file-searching, whilst Steven’s overall greater exposure to University Computer Science courses was expected to give an advantage in the challenges encountered in developing the web crawling module. System integration between these modules was split equally. Steven’s GUI design experience was the motive behind being assigned the development of the Web Crawler System GUI, while the pattern matching experience made it logical for Patrick to take responsibility for the structural and statistical analysis of the Rubaiyat which involved writing statistic gathering software. Project management and documentation were both shared.

Review and Audit Process

The process of reviewing and auditing progress and revising group member roles was well managed throughout the lifecycle of the project. The strategy used focused on several key areas:

  1. Regular (internal) meetings and Gantt chart
  2. Project wiki page
  3. svn Repository
  4. Extensive email Communication

A minimum of one informal meeting per week was held between project members to discuss progress and ensure both Patrick and Steven were satisfied with the current status. These meetings provided a platform to discuss individual challenges encountered and brainstorm solutions to these problems. They also enabled members to query each other’s work to ensure it was at a satisfactory level of quality.

The project wiki page played two main roles. Firstly, the Weekly Progress page was updated each week by both team members. This provided both a self-check mechanism to ensure goals were being achieved and an additional update for the other group member as to their counterpart’s progress. Secondly, shared database areas, such as the Cipher Cross-off List, enabled group members to review each other’s work ensuring it was comprehensive and of high quality.

The svn repository requested from the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering proved extremely valuable as both an auditing function and a work integration tool. The repository was used extensively throughout the project for both the CipherGUI and the Web Crawler system. The top level of the repository is shown in the image below.

The svn repository used by the project in 2011

Finally, a high level of communication played a key role in organising and collaborating project work. Communication was both in person and through the University email system including the Gmail chat functionality. Without this high level of communication, it is unlikely the project would have been as successful as it was, nor achieved nearly as much as it did.

It may be noted that in the Work Allocation graph displayed in the previous section, tasks allocated to one project member were not completed 100% by that member. While partially due to the team self-auditing approach resulting in both members working on sections, there was also an aspect of role re-assignment responsible. Role re-assignment was primarily due to differing workloads combining with schedule requirements. Role re-assignment was organised both through email communications channels and at the regular internal group meetings.

Budget

Costed budget
Item Projected cost Cost
Bay Discovery Centre Exhibition $4.00 $4.00
Additional printing (Project Exhibition) $60.00 $30.00
Total used: $64.00 $34.00
Total provided: $500.00 $500.00

Risk Management

Project risks summary
Risk Risk Estimation Reduction Strategy
Availability of personnel High Regular meetings with flexible schedule
Insufficient financial resources Medium Open source software and project budget
Software development tool access High Suitable personal work environment on laptop for each team member
Unable to maintain software development schedule Medium Progress management strategy
The Somerton Man case is solved Low No risk reduction strategy


Occupational health and safety risk summary
Risk Risk Estimation Reduction Strategy
Physical Hazards
External construction noise Medium
Falls within laboratory Medium
Injuries due to electrical shock Medium
Chemical Hazards
None - -
Biological Hazards
None - -
Ergonomic Hazards
Work place layout Low
Radiation Hazards
None - -
Psychological Hazards
Work related stress Medium
Repetitive tasks Medium

Project Outcomes

Significance and Innovations

Strengths and Weaknesses

Conclusion

References

  1. ↑ https://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/personal/dabbott/wiki/index.php/Final_report_2009:_Who_killed_the_Somerton_man%3F
  2. ↑ https://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/personal/dabbott/wiki/index.php/Final_Report_2010

See also

References and useful resources

Back

Retrieved from "https://www1.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/personal/dabbott/wiki/index.php?title=Final_Report_2011&oldid=7644"