"... In PAGE 4: ... The minimum area implementation of each benchmark circuit is summarized in Table 1. Table2 shows the grouping results; we measured the area of functional units and interconnections, and the maximum depth of serially connected MUXs for three different groupings. The first grouping entitled Imp1 in Table 2 merged all the five DFGs into a single S-HW.... In PAGE 4: ... Table 2 shows the grouping results; we measured the area of functional units and interconnections, and the maximum depth of serially connected MUXs for three different groupings. The first grouping entitled Imp1 in Table2 merged all the five DFGs into a single S-HW. In the row entitled Imp2, we show the result obtained by partitioning them into two groups; the iir filter and the noise canceller are merged into one and the others are merged into the other one.... In PAGE 4: ... The wdc filter, iir filter, and fir filter are merged into one and the others are merged into the other one. Table2 shows the followings: 1) Imp1 shows the best result in terms of the area of functional units. This is due to the fact that as all the DFGs are merged into one, the functional units are shared as much as possible.... ..."

"... In PAGE 10: ...2 The algorithm creates pairs or groups of profiles, putting the closest related profiles together. The results indicate that the average number of profiles in such a cluster is small ( Table5 ). The clusters are mostly pairs.... ..."

"... In PAGE 4: ... However, any circuit may be divided into an arbitrary number of blocks, without loosing the efficiency of the algorithm. The benchmark results are shown in Table1 . After the benchmark name the numbers of the primary inputs (i) and outputs (o) of the circuit are presented.... ..."

"... In PAGE 8: ...Table2... In PAGE 9: ... The content of all pages belong- ing to Group2, Group5 and Group8 are about professional wrestling , 21 of 37 pages (57%) are contained. Comparing the result of Table2 , the total number of pages con- tained in each group has decreased. And since only 1 page is contained in Group8, it is hard to be called a group.... ..."

"... In PAGE 19: ... This change of support is directly attributable to #28some aspects of#29 the group inspection. This can be clearly seen by comparing Table 11 with Table12 , which estimates the group score by forming a union of the three individual scores. In Table 12, the familiar pattern from the individual analysis re-establishes itself, if anything the e#0Bect #28pro-Scenario#29 is even stronger than at the individual level.... ..."

"... In PAGE 9: ...Table3... ..."

"... In PAGE 11: ... It is worth noting that this group was mainly composed of undergraduate students, less expert with Java. Also, note that the best performance within Group A was obtained by the postgraduate student, as shown in Table6 . Table 7 shows the results achieved by students of Group B.... ..."

"... In PAGE 25: ... The means and standard deviations for the level of satisfaction of the selected assessment scheme of the two experimental groups were obtained. As shown in Table6 , the mean score of the consensus level of the GSS-supported group was significantly higher (p=.045).... ..."