### Table 4: Complexity of the analysis of the FMS.

1993

"... In PAGE 20: ...). We de ne the percent error as 100( approx ? exact)= exact. The exact and approximate values for the productivity as a function of N = N1 = N2 = N3 are plotted in Figure 9. Table4 shows the complexity of the analysis for the exact and the approximate solution. jT Aj, A, and nA represent the number of tangible markings, nonzero CTMC entries (excluding the diagonal), and iterations for the numerical solution of the exact model.... ..."

Cited by 79

### Table 1: The complexity analysis of the algorithm

"... In PAGE 5: ...On the basis of data given in Table1 , some conclusions can be made. The fact that complexity of STP grows with the number of nodes is obvious from the first three rows.... In PAGE 5: ... It is also important to have in mind that every iteration lasts more than the previous one because every mathematical model has more rows (constraints) than the previous one. Yet another interesting thing from Table1 is relatively big dispersion (represented by standard deviation) of data obtained by different randomly generated instances with same characteristics. This is a consequence of a nature of the algorithm (which is nondeterministic polynomial).... ..."

### Table 2. Complexity analysis of sdmlc

### Table 3: Complexity analysis for the USC procedure.

1993

"... In PAGE 3: ... The obtained solution (Figure 5) is the same than that presented in [8]. Ro+ Ri- Ai+ Ro- Ai- Ri+ s+ s- Figure 5: STG with the USC property 4 Complexity Analysis Table3 summarizes the complexity analysis for each step of the procedure for solving USC con icts. For sim- plicity, we have considered n = max(jT j; jP j).... ..."

Cited by 5

### Table 5: Complexity analysis for the USC procedure.

"... In PAGE 17: ... The obtained solution ( gure 7) is the same than that presented in [LMBSV92]. Ro+ Ri- Ai+ Ro- Ai- Ri+ s+ s- Figure 7: STG with the USC property 5 Complexity analysis Table5 summarizes the complexity analysis for each step of the procedure for solving USC con- icts. For simplicity, we have considered n = max(jS t a j; jP j).... ..."

### Table 2: Complexity analysis in terms of the number of targets.

"... In PAGE 10: ...003 s with the number of targets and cameras. In Table2 ,wecom- pare the complexity of these two modes in terms of the num- ber of targets by running the proposed BMCT and a joint- state representation-based MCMC particle filter (MCMC- PF) [9]. The data is obtained by varying the number of tar- gets on the synthetic videos.... ..."

### Table 1: Comparison of LP solvers Complexity Analysis

2005

"... In PAGE 6: ... In order to increase speed and the ability to solve much larger grids with our LP formulation we opted to implement an interior point method. Table1 shows a comparison of analysis times between simplex and IPM. We notice that for the small grid case of 500 nodes, simplex with objective function switching [5] is in fact faster than the IPM, however the performance gains of IPM can be viewed with the much larger grids.... ..."

Cited by 4

### Table 5. Essential parameters for complexity analysis

1999

Cited by 6