### Table 1. Acoustic Conditions

2002

Cited by 4

### Table 1. Acoustic Conditions

2002

Cited by 4

### Table 1. Acoustic Conditions

2003

Cited by 3

### Table 2 Acoustic conditions.

### Table 1: Acoustic Conditions

### Table 2: Price inversions

"... In PAGE 7: ...98 $/MW Review of market data reveals that price inversions have been quite common. Table2 shows the frequency of price inversions since the Rational Buyer Protocol was adopted by the California ISO. Table 2: Price inversions ... ..."

### Table 1. Inverse controller.

2006

"... In PAGE 5: ...1). The figures in Table1 show that the inverse approach re- turns an NMSE significantly lower than one and that 75% of the time the sign of the modification of the Propofol titration returned by the controller coincides with the one chosen by the anesthesiologist. However, the values of table 2 show that the forward approach does not bring any improvement to the inverse strategy.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 3: Locally inverse

in The

"... In PAGE 11: ... Thus, (8) asserts that the inverse of HASMEMBER is PARTYAT, only if the corresponding domain is restricted to WeddingParty. (8) LOCALINVERSEB4WeddingPartyBN HASMEMBERBN PersonBN PARTYATB5 Table3 captures the corresponding translation and target axioms. 3.... ..."

### Table 1: Inverse Table

1998

"... In PAGE 4: ...e., truncn(sd; 8), page 11) in Table1 . The table maps each of the 128 8-bit non-0 signi cands to an 8-bit approximation of its reciprocal.... In PAGE 7: ... At line 6 the variable sd2 is assigned a 32,,17 oating point number that (we will prove) is 1=d with a relative error less than 2?28. This is done by obtaining an initial approximation via Table1 and then re ning it with two iterations of an easily computed variation of the Newton-Raphson method, sdi+1 = sdi(2 ? sdi d) (0 i 1): The variation is obtained by making the following transformations on the equation above. Instead of d we use the oating point number obtained by rounding d with the mode [away 32], i.... In PAGE 26: ...26 It is helpful to generalize away from the particulars of Table1 . Therefore, consider any table mapping keys to values.... In PAGE 26: ... Thus, if a table is quot;-ok and it contains a value v for truncn(d; 8) then jdv ? 1j lt; quot;. It is easy to con rm by computation that Table1 is quot;-ok for quot; = 3=512 and that it contains an entry assigning a value for the 8-bit truncation of every 1 d lt; 2 (e.g.... In PAGE 26: ...roved. Q.E.D. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of checking this proof mechanically is the quot;-ok prop- erty of Table1 . Just as described above, we de ned this property as an ACL2 (Common Lisp) predicate and proved the general lemma stating that any table satisfying that predicate gives su ciently accurate answers.... In PAGE 26: ... Just as described above, we de ned this property as an ACL2 (Common Lisp) predicate and proved the general lemma stating that any table satisfying that predicate gives su ciently accurate answers. When the general lemma is applied to our particular lookup, the system executes the predicate on Table1 to con rm that it has the required property.... In PAGE 27: ...27 var = value error bounds sd0 = (1=d)(1 + quot;sd0(d)) j quot;sd0(d)j lt; 2?8 + 2?9 sdd0 = 1 + quot;sdd0(d) quot;sd0(d) quot;sdd0(d) quot;sd0(d) + 2?30 sd1 = (1=d)(1 ? quot;sd1(d)) 0 quot;sd1(d) quot;sd0(d)2 + sdd1 = (1 ? quot;sdd1(d)) quot;sd1(d) ? 2?30 quot;sdd1(d) quot;sd1(d) sd2 = (1=d)(1 ? quot;sd2(d)) 0 quot;sd2(d) quot;sd1(d)2 + Table 2: Error Analysis for Lines 1-6 ( = 2?29 + 2?31 + (9=512)2?31) the particulars of Table1 are involved in the proof is when the predicate is executed. This example illustrates the value of computation in a general-purpose logic.... ..."

Cited by 27