### Table 1: Maximum-Likelihood Results for the various models

"... In PAGE 21: ... The shaded area is once again the 90% con dence region for the tilted CDM model with tensor uctuations and h = 0:6. Table1 summarizes the features of the most likely power spectra based on the various prior models. The approximate constraint on the combination of cosmological parameters as obtained from the high-likelihood ridge is given for each case.... In PAGE 22: ... For OCDM , without tensor uctuations, the powers are = 0:9 and = 1:4. The similarity of the power spectra obtained using the COBE-normalized CDM models and the COBE-free ? model (see Table1 ) indicates that the PS is predominantly determined by the velocity data. Therefore, we have so far ignored the error associated with the COBE normalization.... ..."

### Table 3 Size of the Markovian semantic models of the six mutual exclusion algorithms

2003

"... In PAGE 41: ... The performance measures we are interested in are the mean numbers of accesses per time unit to the critical section and to the shared variables. They are computed on the Markovian semantic model of each al- gorithm; the size of such models in the case of two programs is shown in Table3 . The former performance index represents the throughput of the al- gorithm and has been specified by assigning bonus reward 1 to every action with type exec csi.... ..."

Cited by 6

### Table A2: Model with adjustments for spatial autocorrelation Markovian type of correction (t values in parentheses)

### TABLE III Maximum-likelihood parameter estimates for various textures. The (set) tag denotes that a parameter was set to the specified value in order to explore different modeling choices.

### Table 3: Probit and two#7Bstage probit estimates of Proposition 187 support

"... In PAGE 11: ... 5 Determinants of Support for Proposition 187 5.1 Two-stage probit results The two-stage probit results are presented in Table3 . To demonstrate the importance of controlling for the endogeneity imposed by the information sources in this election, we present and compare probit and two-stage probit results.... In PAGE 12: ... Next, we present a more thorough discussion in which an av- erage voter is selected allowing probabilities to be computed, and then we compare the relative magnitude of voter characteristics and attitudes on Proposition 187 voting. Table3 goes here First, when we compare both sets of coe#0Ecients from the probit and two-stage pro- bit models, the most signi#0Ccant and important di#0Berence is with respect to the party identi#0Ccation and political ideology coe#0Ecients. In the two-stage model, which allows for the inclusion of an individual apos;s vote in senatorial and gubernatorial races, the party identi#0Ccation coe#0Ecients are not signi#0Ccant, as the literature on initiativevoting predicts; however, when these votes are not included, these coe#0Ecients are signi#0Ccant, which can yield a misleading result.... ..."

### Table III. Maximum-Likelihood Estimates

2002

Cited by 7

### Table I. Maximum-Likelihood Estimates of Ge-

1985

### Table 7 Axioms for IMAC for Markovian observational congruence

"... In PAGE 29: ...able 2), (B40) (cf. Table 5), (R1) through (R3) (cf. Table 2 where guarded means strongly guarded), (RL1) through (RL3) (cf. Table 5), and the axioms listed in Table7 . This axiom system is sound and complete for strongly regular... In PAGE 30: ... Axioms ( 1)-( 3) are the usual axioms for classical weak bisimulation, and ( 4) is a direct adaption of ( 2). Note that no delayed variant of ( 3) is included in Table7 (such as ( ) : (P + :Q)+( ) :Q=( ) : (P + :Q)). This is a consequence of the fact that Markovian observational congruence treats Markovian transitions in the same way as non-internal transitions are treated in branching bisimulation (congruence).... In PAGE 34: ...B4) (cf. Table 2), (R1) through (R3) (cf. Table 2), (RL1) and (RL3) (cf. Table 5), (I1), (RL4) (cf. Table7 ) and the axioms (RL5) and (P1000) listed in Table 9. This axiom system is sound and complete for regular terms in IMC and lumping bisimulation.... In PAGE 35: ...means strongly guarded), and of ( 1) through ( 3) (cf. Table7 ), and of ( 40), ( ) : :P =( ) :P. A0 is sound and complete for strongly regular terms in IMC and lumping observational congruence.... ..."