"... In PAGE 7: ... For every argument a fuzzy rule, which takes into account the argument quality (table 3) , is expressed in the form of Table 4. Table4 depicts the consequents of the fuzzy IF... ..."

"... In PAGE 4: ... The characteristics are described by two attributes: completeness and quality , which are the uncertainty factors . Table2 demonstrate s all possible combinations of position - justification pairs and the corresponding argument completeness . For example, if the position is characterized right and the justification wrong then the argument is incomplete.... ..."

"... In PAGE 11: ... Note that the quality of the resulting reasoning process depends on the adequacy of the knowledge base. In this example, the predicate on depends on whether it applies to physical objects like projectors or books, or to non- physical entities like images, as otherwise the programme spends some time trying to physically move the image onto the door or off the handle! A current limitation of the implementation (and of the model) is that it is unable to decide whether a given conflict or a given tentative solution should be made explicit as an argument or should remain covert ( Table2 , where covert moves are in italics). ... ..."

"... In PAGE 2: ... For the test data, we report on results using the gold-standard Treebank data, and in addition we also report results on automatically parsed data using the Charniak parser (Charniak, 2000) as provided by the CoNLL 2005 shared task. We did this for three rea- sons: (i) our results are directly comparable to those who have used the Charniak parses distributed with the CoNLL 2005 data-set; (ii) we avoid the possi- bility of a better parser identifying a larger number of argument constituents and thus leading to bet- ter results, which is orthogonal to the discrimina- tive power of our proposed LTAG-based features; and (iii) the quality of LTAG derivation trees de- pends indirectly on the quality of head dependen- cies recovered by the parser and it is a well-known folklore result (see Table3 in (McDonald et al.,... In PAGE 6: ... For each argument of A0-A4 and AM, a one-vs-all SVM classifier is trained on both the standard feature set (std) and the augmented feature set (std+ltag). Table3 shows the classifi- cation results on the Gold-standard parses with the 5We use the parses supplied with the CoNLL-2005 shared task for reasons of comparison. gold argument identification; Table 4 and 5 show the classification results on the Charniak parser with the gold argument identification and the automatic ar- gument identification respectively.... In PAGE 6: ...4 Discussion From the results shown in the tables, we can see that by adding the LTAG-based features, the overall per- formance of the systems is improved both for argu- ment identification and for argument classification. Table3 and 4 show that with the gold argu- ment identification, the classification for each class in {A0, A1, A2, A3, AM} consistently benefit from LTAG-based features. Especially for A3, LTAG- based features lead to more than 3 percent improve- ment.... ..."

"... In PAGE 5: ...g tsk xcu tmeincs of tig alysi)bingavilbwh y itae when it can be performed. Table7 provides prtil trade-of anlsi ofth objectivsgnth agumns prted ection 3.2.... In PAGE 5: ...riteria are verification and validation requirements (e.g. the need to perform timing analysis). Table7 shows many of the quality attributes that have to be made when prfoming trade-ofs. When xplringttra-s itwulb ncary to duc blcd e hrthimp ostraitsre tnothrsae cievd swels possible.... In PAGE 5: ... When xplringttra-s itwulb ncary to duc blcd e hrthimp ostraitsre tnothrsae cievd swels possible. Table7 prvi xmplsof uing th methd cn hl catuertin aptos.Fr insa,ayrdw shouldsrt redictable pig ofte softrt ijuifcins J2003 and J2004.... In PAGE 6: ...1 Cost Function Stage 4of the dsign asemnt isexploring the vilbdsignlutofr th cobati tabs mt h ytms bjctivs.Fr h ce of Table7 tis eaha fr atingprsctive anlyse ndto peomedo emota h following: 1. Normal (showing timing requirements are met).... ..."

"... In PAGE 4: ... We further examine the quality of the fourth-order Taylor and Schraudolph approximations by investigating how they vary with the size of the argument. To illus- trate this dependence, we show in Table1 the bias of an out-of-the-money European call pricing simulation with varying maturity T. The longer the maturity, the greater the variability of the argument to the exponential.... In PAGE 4: ...K=S0/ or a small multiple of it. For the examples in Table1 , it was necessary to use a better random number generator than the rand function of libm, which introduced bias of up to 0.8%.... In PAGE 4: ... Table1 shows that the relative bias induced in call prices is unacceptably large for the Schraudolph approximation, and is acceptable for the fourth order Taylor approximation only when the arguments are small enough. The superi- ority on small arguments of a Taylor approximation about zero motivated the combination with elementary argument reduction ideas to produce the bargain algorithm.... ..."

"... In PAGE 89: ...05. Table 18 Message Types Expressed to Coworkers by Quality of Relationship in Interviews Quality of Relationship Message Type High Low Medium Uncertain Total Asking for Information 2 2 Assertiveness 1 1 Coalitions 5 3 8 Display Emotion 10 1 2 1 14 Rational Argument 1 1 2 Recall Events 5 1 1 7 Solution Presentation 1 1 Total 25 2 7 2 35 Similarly, Table19 displays the crosstabulation of message types expressed to coworkers with various levels of quality of relationship. A chi-square value of 19.... ..."

"... In PAGE 31: ... Process variation is defined as the variation in performance across the eleven individual process performance scores for each bank. The fundamental question addressed in Frei et al (1997) is which is more important for a bank, to do a few things well and, hence, to do other things not so well, or to provide a reasonably consistent set of service delivery processes to the customer? What ultimately matters, occasional excellence or consistency? To address this question, the model from Table 4 was expanded to include process variation, as shown in Table5 . As can be 2 The previous study does not argue that consistently poor performance is a good strategy but rather evidence is presented in terms of an analytical model and empirical data that suggests that if there is an additional resource to be invested in a firm, then the investment should go to improving consistency rather than in moving a single... ..."