S
Scott T. Leutenegger
Researcher at University of Denver
Publications - 46
Citations - 3213
Scott T. Leutenegger is an academic researcher from University of Denver. The author has contributed to research in topics: R-tree & Game mechanics. The author has an hindex of 21, co-authored 46 publications receiving 3132 citations. Previous affiliations of Scott T. Leutenegger include University of Wisconsin-Madison & Langley Research Center.
Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Indexing the positions of continuously moving objects
TL;DR: A novel, R*-tree based indexing technique that supports the efficient querying of the current and projected future positions of moving objects and is capable of indexing objects moving in one-, two-, and three-dimensional space is proposed.
Proceedings ArticleDOI
STR: a simple and efficient algorithm for R-tree packing
TL;DR: The results from an extensive comparison study of three R-tree packing algorithms are presented: the Hilbert and nearest-X packing algorithms, and an algorithm which is very simple to implement, called the STR (Sort-Tile-Recursive) algorithm.
Proceedings ArticleDOI
The performance of multiprogrammed multiprocessor scheduling algorithms
TL;DR: It is found that the “smallest number of processes first” (SNPF) scheduling discipline performs poorly, and policies that allocate an equal fraction of the processing power to each job in the system perform better, on the whole, than policies that allocated processing power unequally.
Proceedings ArticleDOI
A games first approach to teaching introductory programming
TL;DR: This paper argues for using a "Game First" approach to teaching introductory programming, and describes the experiences after redesigning and offering a new introductory computer science sequence using 2D game development as a unifying theme.
Book ChapterDOI
Benchmarks and Standards for the Evaluation of Parallel Job Schedulers
Steve J. Chapin,Walfredo Cirne,Dror G. Feitelson,James Patton Jones,Scott T. Leutenegger,Uwe Schwiegelshohn,Warren Smith,David Talby +7 more
TL;DR: The evaluation of parallel job schedulers hinges on the workloads used, and it is suggested that this be standardized, in terms of both format and content, so as to ease the evaluation and comparison of different systems.