Tools
Sorted by:
Try your query at:
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Results 1 - 10
of
25,495
Table 2:Significant portions of the meaning vectors for 5 component sounds, inferred from the pilot study.
"... In PAGE 3: ... These tokens varied in vowel --- [a], [e], or [o] --- and in presence or absence of [h] and [m]. Table2 shows those results that met a 1% confidence level by the t-test. Strong correlations were found between [o] and surprise and interest, and between the presence of [m] and the state of being in thought.... ..."
(Table 1) were reported to be occupied on their promoters by Nanog in ES cells [12] and therefore are very likely pri- mary targets of Nanog. The annotation of these genes sug- gests that a relatively significant portion of them are
2006
"... In PAGE 5: ... This resulted in 24, 18, and 71 genes for NIH3T3, H1299, and HCT116, respectively. These genes (Table1 ), that comprise about 10% of the genes reg- ulated by Nanog in our cell lines can be considered as pri- mary targets of Nanog, since it was shown that Nanog interacts with their promoters [12]. It is interesting that a significant part of the direct targets of Nanog are transcrip- tion factors and regulators of gene expression (Table 1).... In PAGE 5: ... STAT3 is also known to be required for self-renewal in murine ES cells, where it is activated by LIF but exogenous LIF can be replaced by overexpres- sion of Nanog [2]. Additionally, in NIH3T3 cells JUN-B is upregulated (Table1 ). JUN-B is an oncogene and contrib- ute to cell transformation and focus formation in rat embryo fibroblasts [21].... ..."
Table 1 shows the set of conditions that can be used to qualify the control of the performance monitor counters. Thus, with the MMCR the MSR can control the state of the monitor. By incorporating a significant portion of the control of the monitoring function in the MSR, this control becomes part of the process state and is thus saved and restored by the interrupt response activity of the
"... In PAGE 3: ... When MSR(PM) = 0, the associated process is unmarked. The state of the monitor with respect to MSR(PM) depends on the setting of MMCR(DMS) and MMCR(DMR) as defined by Figure 2 and Table1 . The setting of the MSR(PM) bit is not altered by the execution of a supervisor call (SVC) instruction, but is set to zero when any other interrupt is fielded, so the monitoring effect of the PM bit is preserved across calls to the kernel.... In PAGE 5: ... 1 Monitor mode control register format. i apos; Table1 Defined monitoring states. DIS DP DU DMS DMR Disabled Counted 0 ~~~~~~~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 Nothing Everything 0 0 0 0 1 -PM Marked (PR = X) 0 0 0 1 0 +PM Unmarked (PR = X) 0 0 1 0 0 + PR Privileged (PM = X) 0 1 0 0 0 -PR Not privileged (PM = X) 0 0 1 0 1 +PR or -PM Privileged AND marked 0 0 1 1 0 +PR or +PM Privileged AND unmarked 0 1 0 0 1 -PR or -PM Not privileged AND marked 0 1 0 1 0 -PR or +PM Not privileged AND unmarked X X X 1 1 Everything Nothing X 1 1 X X Everything Nothing 1 X X X X Everything Nothing 549 IBM J.... ..."
Table 3 shows the wire length reduction percentage of different pin nets for each test case. It is not hard to find that our approach has most significant wire length reduction on multi-pin nets, especially while the pin number exceeds 50. This will benefit timing closure for the whole design. Since in general, multi-pin nets or high fanout nets contribute most significant portion of interconnect delay in the most timing critical path of a circuit.
2005
"... In PAGE 7: ...707 31.631 Table3... ..."
Cited by 6
Table 2 Number of multiplications and additions (with a scaling factor of number-of-data- rows) performed by the naive algorithm and FMC for correctly detecting significant changes in the correlation matrix and identifying the portions of the matrix with the significantly changed coefficients.
"... In PAGE 17: ... Our experiments were carried out with finite re- source constraints. Table2 shows the number of multiplications and additions... ..."
Table 6 illustrates the properties of the five basic error detection methods we have presented. Together, they span a significant portion of the landscape of potential error detection methodologies. However, the careful reader will note that a number of potential methods have been left unaddressed. These methods can be classified into two groups depicted in Table 7.
"... In PAGE 7: ... 5.6 Discussion of Basic Methods Name ED1 ED2 ED3 SM - - C JBD - - J GSM - A C AGBM G - C GVM G A C Table6 : Summary of Basic Error Detection Methods Table 6 illustrates the properties of the five basic error detection methods we have presented. Together, they span a significant portion of the landscape of potential error detection methodologies.... ..."
Table 3: Comparing the efficiency of the variable-length encoder vs. the stack-based encoder. The total bit-stream sizes are in bytes. 5% percent of the total bit-stream size represents a significant pro- portion of the connectivity (perhaps all of it) and is thus very sig- nificant for stitches.
"... In PAGE 7: ... The same applies to per-vertex prop- erties. Table3 compares the efficiencies of the stack-based encoder and variable-length encoder by measuring total bit-stream sizes. The observed bitstream sizes decrease using the variable-length encoder, in three cases by about 5%.... ..."
Table 3 shows the recognition accuracies of the algorithms in each of the experiments. The results on the PIE database are consistent with the outcome of the experiments on the AR database. Overall, the performance of FaceIt and Fisherfaces are acceptable in most of the illumination conditions. The overall trend is that the PIE Illumination 1 experiment is the easiest, the AR experiments are slightly more difficult, and PIE Illumination 2 is the most difficult. The result is understandable as in a large number of Illumination 2 images, significant portions of the faces are invisible, see Figure 3.
2001
"... In PAGE 16: ... Table3 : Illumination results. PIE 1 and 2 refer to the two illumination conditions described in Section 2.... ..."
Cited by 45
Table 3 shows the recognition accuracies of the algorithms in each of the experiments. The results on the PIE database are consistent with the outcome of the experiments on the AR database. Overall, the performance of FaceIt and Fisherfaces are acceptable in most of the illumination conditions. The overall trend is that the PIE Illumination 1 experiment is the easiest, the AR experiments are slightly more difficult, and PIE Illumination 2 is the most difficult. The result is understandable as in a large number of Illumination 2 images, significant portions of the faces are invisible, see Figure 3.
2001
"... In PAGE 16: ... Table3 : Illumination results. PIE 1 and 2 refer to the two illumination conditions described in Section 2.... ..."
Cited by 45
Table I lists the quantities calculated from (8), (9). (lo), and (1 1) for various cluster size, N. For N = 7, about 19% of the service area can be served by borrowed channels. For N = 12, the fraction is 39%. Based on this analysis, it appears that the CBWL scheme can maintain the same SIR as FCA while also allowing borrowed channels to be used in a significant portion of the system apos;s coverage area.
1994
Cited by 17
Results 1 - 10
of
25,495
