### TABLE I EBNF FORMALIZATION OF COARSE ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS. FOR THE SAKE OF COMPACTNESS WE OMIT THE DEFINITION OF CURSIVE PRINTED NON-TERMINALS.

### Table 4. Additional Compact Notation

2007

"... In PAGE 13: ... The first group of definitions in Table 3 defines the compact notation for each of the 13 proper expression categories we defined above. The next group of definitions in Table4 defines additional compact notation... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 4: Additional Compact Notation

2007

"... In PAGE 11: ... The first group of definitions in Table 3 defines the compact notation for each of the 13 proper expression categories. The next group of definitions in Table4 defines additional compact no- tation for the built-in operators and the universal quantifier. We will often employ the following abbreviation rules when using the compact notation: 1.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 4: Additional Compact Notation

2007

"... In PAGE 11: ... The first group of definitions in Table 3 defines the compact notation for each of the 13 proper expression categories. The next group of definitions in Table4 defines additional compact no- tation for the built-in operators and the universal quantifier. We will often employ the following abbreviation rules when using the compact notation: 1.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 4: Additional Compact Notation

2007

"... In PAGE 11: ... The first group of definitions in Table 3 defines the compact notation for each of the 13 proper expression categories. The next group of definitions in Table4 defines additional compact no- tation for the built-in operators and the universal quantifier. We will often employ the following abbreviation rules when using the compact notation: 1.... ..."

### Table 1. Formula One and Tennis domain definitions (dominant color descriptor (DC), motion descriptor (MOV), compactness descriptor (CPS), adjacency relation (ADJ), and inclusion rela- tion (INC))

in Dijk

2005

Cited by 2

### Table 1: Variable Definitions

1999

"... In PAGE 9: ...wo specified body types. Thus the respondent faced a choice among six alternatives. However, the total number of distinct alternatives was 120, consisiting of each combination of 4 fuels (gas, methanol, compressed natural gas, electricity), 5 size classes (mini, subcompact, compact, mid- size, large), and 6 body types (regular car, sports car, truck, van, station wagon, sports utility vehicle). The variables that enter the model are defined in Table1 . The choice of variables to enter the nonstochastic portion of utility was determined though exploration and testing with a standard logit model.... ..."

Cited by 25

### Table 2: Compaction Results

1998

"... In PAGE 6: ... The performance of MinTest on test set compaction is compared against the twobest test set compaction algorithms published in the literature, CompacTest (CT) [8, 9, 12] and TSC [4]. The comparison of the performance results is presented in Table2 . In the table, the smallest known test size for each circuit is marked by an asterisk (*).... ..."

Cited by 104

### Table 5.1 Comparison of wireless sensor network based applications with BriMon

2007

### Table 40: Compaction Phase

2007

"... In PAGE 74: ... Thus, the internal fragmentation of the page is removed. Table40 shows pseudocode of the compaction phase.... ..."