Assignment  -1:

Aims

To develop familiarity with standard algorithms and data structures - linear data structures, trees and graph structures, sorting and searching.

To develop an understanding of basic concepts and features of concurrency

- semaphores, shared memory, message passing, monitors, threads; dead- lock, starvation, non-determinism.

To develop an awareness of principles of quantum computing.

Outcomes to be assessed

Describe a range of useful algorithms and the properties and uses of common data structures.

Demonstrate a knowledge of the characteristics of a range of concurrency paradigms.

Explain the differences between classical and quantum computing.

Develop complex algorithms and data structures to solve practical problems.

Implement working concurrent software using appropriate programming lan- guage semantics.

Logbook requirements

You are required to develop a logbook of practical work undertaken in this module. Your logbook will be developed throughout the year, except for the last few weeks of term 2. There are no major restrictions on how you should develop your logbook except that it should be a tool that will assist your learning on this module. Basically, it is a record of your practical work in the module. In each set of practical exercises up to week 20 one or more questions will be identified as a requirement for inclusion in your logbook, but you are free to include other work if you feel that this will improve the logbook. Also, most weeks will have one exercise that will be identified as a "model" exercise. These exercises have been selected as being similar to the logbook exercises. Model answers will be published for the model exercises one week after the last scheduled practical for that set of exercises.

Since model answers are being provided for the model questions there is no point in including these in your logbook (unless you believe your answers are better than the model answers, in which case please do include them, explaining why they are better).

The logbook will be assessed on its completeness and use as a source of reference. In week 8, in Consolidation Week, in week 18, and in week 22 (the hand in week) you will be asked to complete a self-assessment of your progress and performance on the module and this will become part of your logbook.

Assignment -2:

A digital forensics investigation of a seized pen drive.

Introduction

Scenario: The UK government have decided that images of Penguins are illegal and their possession, creation or distribution is illegal. The first person to be arrested under this new law has had a pen drive and a Galaxy S6 phone taken from them for analysis. In groups of 2, your task is to analyse the contents of the pen drive and document any metadata in the files present. From your findings you must decide if a crime has been committed, the level of the offence and support your claims with evidence.A forensic image of the suspects pen drive can be found on Canvas.

If you identify anyone from your investigation please DO NOT contact them.

Learning Outcome to be assessed

1 Identify suitable methods and tools for developing solutions to problems in computer forensics.
2 Demonstrate knowledge of the investigative skills in computer forensics.

Detail of the task
The coursework is to be completed in groups of 2. This is to simulate team working that would be present in the Computer Forensics industry. Each group will need to complete a peer assessment form to document the contribution from each group member. You can complete the coursework as an individual but you must accept that you would have an increased workload.

Part 1. Evidence identification. You are required to analyse and interpret the data contained on the pen drive. In particular, you are looking for evidence related to identifying who the pen drive belongs to. If any potential crimes have been committed then what they are and evidence to support your claims. A section called Evidence will be included in your final report and should contain items such as:

- Metadata for each of the files found on the pen drive. You need to decide what metadata needs to be recorded for each file type. Marks are awarded for choosing the correct metadata categories and for stating the correct information for the chosen metadata categories;
- You need to include a reference for each of the applications used in your investigation;

Part 2. Report. In addition to your Evidence section, you are required to present your methodology and findings within your report. Your methodology is the steps you took in the solving of the case. You are required to demonstrate that your evidence is robust and maintains integrity. You should include an overview of your methodology and the programs you used during the investigation. In addition, you must detail any findings and recommendations gained from your analysis with supporting evidence.

Your report will be assessed on the following criteria:

- Quality of the report. Ensure that the report is laid out in a logical order and that any figures or tables are clear to read. Please ensure that you have spell checked your work before submission;

- An overview of your methodology. How did you recover the information that you have used as metadata. You need to explain the process for each file type on the pen drive;

- Identification of relevant files. This should be a list of the files that are evidence and include an explanation as to why they are evidence;

- The findings and recommendations of your analysis. You need to decide whether there is enough evidence to arrest the suspect for possession, distribution and creation of images of Penguins. Also need to give ideas for further investigation as to what else you would seize, investigate and those you would want to interview.

Assignment -3:

Learning Outcomes
To pass this unit, you will need to be able to demonstrate that you are able to:

1. Critically evaluate and critique current research and scholarship in an engineering discipline and propose new and technically advanced hypotheses.

2. Evaluate the industrial and professional context of an engineering problem including safety, environmental and ethical considerations and make a fluent presentation of the work and findings to a technical audience.

3. Work autonomously to systematically analyse complex engineering problems to provide credible potential solutions and submit a technical report/dissertation.

4. Present and defend the project work to academic specialists in the field.

1. Pre-requisite Skills and Knowledge
This unit is designed for students who already have a basic grasp of the following skills and knowledge in the following areas:
- Engineering Structural Integrity
- Embedded Systems and Systems on a Chip
- Industrial Communication Systems
- Management Practice

If you think you need some help with any of these areas, please contact the Programme Support Tutors.
2. Practical Arrangements
You will need access to the following software for this unit:
- Microsoft Office
- Matlab
- C' Programming
Please note that admission to laboratory and workshop classes are not permitted if you miss the introductory health and safety briefing or if you do not have the appropriate clothing. Project Title : Design and implementation a beacon system to improve shopping experience

Identifying a need/context : In a shopping centre, vendors need to communicate with their customers about their products, services and offers but the shortage of employees could prevent that. Buyers need to get update as soon as they approach the shops to get maximum value. So, this project could help both customers and vendors to gain the advantage of this system.

Aim: This project aims to design electronic system to help vendors during the shopping process to communicate with via Bluetooth low energy.

Objectives :
To investigate and understand Bluetooth low energy technology.
To understand how to apply this technology.
To implement mobile app that can be use in this system.
To make recommendation for how to improve the system to get farther enhancement.

Methods:
The project consists of two parts: the first part is Hardware and the second part is the software.
The hardware is designed to produce a beacon signal using Nordic Semiconductor nRF51 board. In this part Also the embedded ARM design on this board should be programmed.
The software part aims to create a program for the mobile phones that can detect the beacon signal and produce all benefit for the users also it can guide them to specific directions.

Assignment - 4:

Learning Outcomes
- Understand concepts underpinning GIS and remote sensing, and relate them to hazards applications, making effective use of key datasets and tools.
- Develop an understanding of geospatial techniques for emergency planning and search and rescue.
- Evaluate GIS and Geographic Analysis techniques for determining risk.

Background
The East of England Lifeboat Service (EELS) is a charitable lifeboat organisation operating on the east coast of England. Although similar in nature to the RNLI, they are an entirely different organisation. They currently have 10 lifeboat stations along the east coast, but due to a combination of improvements to lifeboat engineering, successful coastal safety campaigns and budgetary constraints they have decided to close up to four of their 10 stations.

You have been employed as a consultant to provide a GIS-based rationale forselectingthe four lifeboat stations to close and the six to remain.

Your Data

You have been provided the following data:

1. Road network with segment lengths in metres and the minutes it takes to traverse along each segment.

2. Current EELs stations.

3. Non-EELs stations that are not under consideration for closure.

4. The home addresses of registered lifeboat crew members.

5. The last 20 years' worth of wrecks in the North Sea off this coastline.

You may also use any other data sets you see fit.

Analytical approach
You must undertake a location-allocation analysis (McLafferty 2003; Church 2005; Murray 2010) that identifies four stations for potential closure. Your solution aim is to minimise overall lifeboat response time, where response time is the length of time required for crew members to travel from their homes to their lifeboat station plus the time taken to travel from the lifeboat station to the incident. There is no one correct way of achieving this; however, some approaches are better than others. Good solutions will, however, have these properties:

- Have a sound theoretical basis.
- Have been used to solve practical problems in the past, and may be approved as ‘good' or ‘best' practice.
- Are quantitative rather than qualitative.
- Are well-documented.
- Have well-understood limitations in respect of uncertainty in both the data and methodology.

ArcGIS Network Analyst supports a number of netwrk analysis tool that you may find useful in addressing the problem including a Location-Allocation analysis tool that proivdes a structured approach for optimising locations on a network depending on the defined criteria. You may find this tool useful, but remember that you are trying to balance accessability of crew to stations, a network location-allocation problem and accessibility of station to incidents that aresepeparate from the road network.

You must submit a report (2000 words max) that describes the analysis undertaken to identify the stations to remain open or to close. Communicate information using maps and figures in preference to text wherever possible.

Explain the problem.

From the literature identify and evaluate alternative analytical techniques.

In light of the literature, select, justify and implement an analytical workflow that identifies four lifeboat stations that might be closed.
Explain the limitations of your analysis.

Use high-quality maps and other figures to explain, support and critically evaluate both your method and the results.

Attachment:- project data.zip