### Table 2: Formal Interpretation of the basic RQL path expressions

2000

"... In PAGE 12: ...alues, etc.) and introduce variables, RQL provides a select-from-where lter. Given that the whole description base can be viewed as a collection of nodes/edges, path expressions can be used in RQL lters for the traversal of RDF graphs at arbitrary depths. The formal semantics of RQL lters and path expressions is given in Table2 . Consider, for instance, the following query: Q1: Find the resources having a title property.... ..."

Cited by 8

### Table 2: Formal Interpretation of the basic RQL path expressions

2000

"... In PAGE 11: ...alues, etc.#29 and introduce variables, RQL provides a select-from-where #0Clter. Given that the whole description base can be viewed as a collection of nodes#2Fedges, path expressions can be used in RQL #0Clters for the traversal of RDF graphs at arbitrary depths. The formal semantics of RQL #0Clters and path expressions are given in Table2 . Consider, for instance, the following query: Q1: Find the resources having a title property.... ..."

Cited by 8

### Table 1.3. Formal interpretation of the basic RQL path expressions

### Table 7. Path about Networking Basics

2003

"... In PAGE 26: ...The results in Table7 show that, the Elephants page moved 8.5 degrees away from the path whereas the CNN Financials page moved 0.... ..."

### Table 3. Numerical results for the probability of buffer over ow Basic Basic Enhanced Enhanced Path Decomposition

### Table 4. Numerical results for the probability of buffer ushing Basic Basic Enhanced Enhanced Path Decomposition

### Table 1 Selected reservation paths and their percentages in QRGs gen- erated from figure 10(a), by basic and tradeoff, respectively. Selected path (see figure 10(a)) basic tradeoff

### Table 7: Evaluation of trace insertion and antecedent recovery for C04 algorithm, our basic algorithm and basic algorithm with the subject path constraint.

"... In PAGE 7: ...1). Table7 shows the results of the basic al- gorithm for trace insertion and antecedent recovery on both stripped CTB trees and parser output trees. For comparison, we implemented the C04 algorithm on our data and evaluated the result.... In PAGE 7: ... Since the ba- sic algorithm focus on argument traces, results for arguments only are given separately. Table7 shows that the C04 algorithm achieves a high precision but as expected a low recall due to its limitation to certain types of NLDs. By con- trast, our basic algorithm scored higher recall but lower precision, which is understandable as the C04 algorithm identifies the trace given a known an- tecedent, whereas our algorithm tries to identify both the trace and antecedent.... ..."