"... In PAGE 61: ... Grafarend and P. Lohse (1991, Table4 , p.108).... ..."

"... In PAGE 28: ... For 1994 and 1998 there is a signi#0Ccant tendency for electors who have higher values of #12 i to be more likely to vote than electors who havelower values of #12 i : conservative electors were especially mobilized in those two elections. *** Table1 about here *** In every year, the coordinating model passes the parameter-based tests of the conditions neces- sary for it to describe coordinating behavior. Table 2 reports the LR test statistics for the constraint #0B = 1, imposed separately for eachyear.... In PAGE 29: ... The House position was expected to be closer to the Democratic position in 1978, 1982, 1986 and 1990, closer to the Republican position in 1994 and 1998. The MLEs for #0B in the coordinating model are less than :5inevery year except one #28see Table1 #29, suggesting that electors expected the Presidenttobeweaker than the House in determining post-midterm policy. *** Table 4 about here *** The distribution of the ordering of electors apos; ideal points with respect to the post-election policies electors expect according to the coordinating model shows that the moderating mechanism of the coordinating model is capable of generating a midterm cycle of the kind emphasized by Alesina and Rosenthal #281989; 1995#29, though it need not do so.... In PAGE 37: ... NES survey respondents mayoverreport the frequency with which they vote. Among the 9,639 cases from years 1978#7B98 that we use to compute the parameter estimates reported in Table1 , the ! i -weighted percentage reporting having voted is, by year: 47.... In PAGE 38: ... 19. Table1 shows #0B 90 , #0B 94 , #1A 78 , #1A 86 , #1A 90 and #1A 98 to have MLEs equal to either 0:0or1:0, on the conceptual boundary of the parameter space. Consequently, the asymptotic distributions of the MLEs and the LR test statistics are complicated #28Moran 1971; Self and Liang 1987#29.... In PAGE 39: ...Table1 to tabulate that mixture distribution and estimate the con#0Cdence intervals of Table 3. 20.... In PAGE 48: ...524 .455 Note: Computed using the parameter MLEs in Table1 and 1978#7B98 ANES data. Table 5: Orderings of Ideal Points and Expected PartyPolicy Positions, byYear Ordering year #12 i #3C ~ #12 Mi ; ~ #12 i ~ #12 Mi #3C#12 i #3C ~ #12 i ~ #12 i #3C#12 i #3C ~ #12 Mi ~ #12 Mi ; ~ #12 i #3C#12 i #12 Di = #12 Ri amp; i =0 1978 19.... In PAGE 48: ... Entries show the percentage of electors in eachyear who have #12 Di #3C#12 Ri and the indicated ordering of ideal point and expected policy positions, or who have #12 Di = #12 Ri , or who lack policy position values #28 amp; i = 0#29. Computed using the parameter MLEs in Table1 and 1978#7B98 ANES data. Percentages for those with #12 Di #3E#12 Ri are, byyear: #12 i #3C ~ #12 i #285.... ..."

"... In PAGE 32: ...0 integrated with eRoom Real Time Services. Table1 _ Enhancements to CASE tools Our study concluded that no single tool came close to covering the needs of GST. Also, no combination of tools could provide an ideal environment.... In PAGE 38: ....1. Influencing factors We base our analysis on a taxonomy of 16 influencing factors of distributed and interdisciplinary development projects according to [3]. Table1 shows these factors with their parameter values. It combines ... In PAGE 39: ...[4][5][6], as well as the factors resulting from the interaction of different domains presented in [7]. Table1 . Influencing factors 2.... In PAGE 39: ...2. Empirical study In the empirical study 18 standard IT-tools which support global development projects have been rated by experts for their support of cooperation projects with respect to the influencing factors of Table1 . The survey was carried out by interviewing experts in distributed projects, interdisciplinary projects, cooperation projects, and Information Technology (IT).... In PAGE 39: ... Our goal is to determine with the help of the expert data which factors have more impact on the selection of each tool. The input factors are shown in Table1 . Their value sets are derived from the results of the survey in [8].... In PAGE 46: ... Role-Oriented Notification System In order to fully address the REQM needs GSD project participants need a generic mechanism to ensure timely notifications about changes to requirements or other artifacts in addition to the common data exchange for- mat mentioned above [13][14]. Multiple requirements- related events may happen concurrently at several sites across a GSD project (see overview in Table1 ), which would seem relevant for project team members at other sites. For example, when requirement 4711 in the re- quirements management tool changes (event in the requirements management tool), the developer who works on this requirement can be notified, e.... In PAGE 47: ...ule set; e.g., which rules should be active. Events in the REQM tool new requirement is inserted Existing requirement is changed New user is added User privileges are changed Events in the IDE Trace is created between source code element and re- quirement Events in the Configuration Management tool New change request was submitted State of an artifact changed Check-in of an artifact Events in the test management tool Bug report is inserted Test cases for a particular requirement are reported as successfully tested. Table1 . Examples for events in GSD tool support.... In PAGE 52: ... The timeframe for the MaPIT research project is three years, spanning from January 2007 to December 2009. The preliminary schedule for the proposed research is shown on Table1 . Schedule Date Activity 01/2007 Initiation of the research project 03/2007 - 09/2007 First interview round 05/2007 - 11/2007 Analysis of first interview round 01/2008 - 04/2008 Second interview round 03/2008 First survey 06/2008 Stage 1 research data col- lected 09/2008 - 11/2009 Consecutive interview rounds 03/2009 Second survey 12/2009 Stage 2 research data col- lected Table 1.... In PAGE 52: ... The preliminary schedule for the proposed research is shown on Table 1. Schedule Date Activity 01/2007 Initiation of the research project 03/2007 - 09/2007 First interview round 05/2007 - 11/2007 Analysis of first interview round 01/2008 - 04/2008 Second interview round 03/2008 First survey 06/2008 Stage 1 research data col- lected 09/2008 - 11/2009 Consecutive interview rounds 03/2009 Second survey 12/2009 Stage 2 research data col- lected Table1 . The proposed research will be made as a part of MaPIT project, and thus its schedule follows the schedule of the research project.... In PAGE 58: ...2. Use of the coordination tools Table1 shows the number of proposals (requests of turn, compilation proposals, and execution proposals) and answers made with the coordination tools. There are two surprising results.... ..."

"... In PAGE 30: ... MLEs and standard errors (SEs) for the parameters of both models appear in Table 2.19 The coor- dinating model estimates in Table2 use method two (beta approximation) to compute ^ P. Most of the parameters that have the same interpretation in both models have statistically indistinguish- able estimates.... In PAGE 36: ...be at least an equal of the House in determining postelection policy. Most of the D and R point estimates are greater than :5 (see Table2 ), which suggests that voters usually believe the President to have more weight in policy outcomes than does the House. Jimmy Carter running for reelection in 1980 is an exception (^ D;80 = :4), but the most striking case of anticipating a weak President is Bob Dole in 1996 (^ R;96 = :1).... In PAGE 42: ... Table2 shows D;76, D;92, R;80, and R;96 to have MLEs equal to 1:0, on the conceptual boundary of the parameter space. The boundary is not a \natural quot; boundary (Moran 1971b) for the probabil- ity model: LC is a proper (although meaningless) likelihood for values of D, D, or R outside [0; 1].... In PAGE 42: ... For the coordinating voting model, the hypothesis D;76 = D;92 = R;80 = R;96 = 1 implies a distribution that is a mixture of 16 censored distributions. I use a bootstrap (20,000 resamples) of the score vectors associated with the MLEs of Table2 to tabulate that mixture distribution and estimate the con dence intervals of Table 4.... In PAGE 42: ...stimate the con dence intervals of Table 4. With a few substantial exceptions (e.g., R;88) the con dence intervals do not di er greatly from the intervals obtained by using normal theory with the MLEs and SEs in Table2 (i.... In PAGE 51: ... It is important to keep clear that bHP refers to local variations among equilibria. Numerical computations using the NES data and the parameter MLEs of Table2 show that @ ^ P `|=@| lt; 0 and @ ^ H`|=@` lt; 0 for `; | 2 (0; 1). Moreover, the values ^ P `| = ` are decreasing in |, and the values ^ H`| = | are decreasing in ` for `; | 2 (0; 1) (see Appendix A for the `; | notation).... In PAGE 66: ...6 Note: Entries show the percentage of voters in each year who have the indicated ordering of ideal point and expected party policy positions. Computed using the parameter MLEs in Table2 and... In PAGE 67: ...8 Note: Entries show the percentage of voters in each year for whom the indicated vote choice minimizes xphi ? zphi, ph 2 K, which is the policy-related component of the e ect the voter apos;s choice has on the voter apos;s expected loss. Computed using the parameter MLEs in Table2 and 1976{96 NES data. Each observation is weighted by the sampling weight 1=!i.... ..."

"... In PAGE 3: ... 10 cycles were performed for each level of additive noise. Table1 presents the error of reprojection, focal length f and coordinates of principal point u0 and v0 in case of ideal noise-free data. All values are in pixels.... ..."

"... In PAGE 29: ... *** Table 4 about here *** The distribution of the ordering of electors apos; ideal points with respect to the post-election policies electors expect according to the coordinating model shows that the moderating mechanism of the coordinating model is capable of generating a midterm cycle of the kind emphasized by Alesina and Rosenthal #281989; 1995#29, though it need not do so. Table5 shows that in four of the six years more electors had ideal points located relative to the expected policy ~ #12 i in a way that gave them an incentivetovote against candidates of the same party as the President than had ideal points located relativeto ~ #12 i in a way that gave them an incentivetovote for candidates of the same party as the President. In 1978 and 1994, years when the Presidentwas a Democrat, respectively 38.... In PAGE 29: ...8#25 had #12 i #3C ~ #12 i , suggesting what did occur, namely a midterm gain for the President apos;s party rather than a midterm loss. *** Table5 about here *** For most years the MLEs for the non-coordinating model do not support the theory of non-... ..."

"... In PAGE 23: ... For each set of noisy data, we apply once our multistage algorithm by using the pixel image coordinates and once by using the normalized image coordinates, and we calculate the estimated rotation angle which should be ideally 0 and the angle between the estimated translation vector and the true one. The averages of these measures are shown in Table2 and Table 3. We can nd that better results, especially in translation, have been obtained when pixel image coordinates are used.... ..."

"... In PAGE 23: ... Figure 8 shows estimates after thresholding with Daubechies and Geronimo wavelets. Table5 compares the universal threshold with the ideal threshold, the ideal threshold being the value which gives the smallest MSE with the number of levels to be thresholded xed. The MSE for the universal threshold with the Geronimo multiwavelets is very similar to the MSE for the ideal threshold despite the threshold values being reasonably di erent.... ..."

"... In PAGE 2: ... Branch misprediction re- covery is performed as soon as a mispredicted branch is ex- ecuted. The cache latencies reported in Table1 and 2 are futur- istic values anticipating smaller feature sizes [1].... ..."

"... In PAGE 5: ... Each column of Tables 4 through 6 is labeled XY Z, where X is the issue rate, Y indicates either restricted (r) or general (g) code percolation, and Z indicates in-order (i) or out-of-order (o) execution. Ideal Cache Results Figure 1 and Table4 present speedup results for an in - nite rst level data cache. Overall, restricted out-of-order execution performs slightly better than general in-order execution.... ..."