### Table 1: Two possible step constructions in Statecharts

"... In PAGE 28: ... The function NextConfig calculates the new state con guration given the old state con guration C and the set of transitions T . The possible constructions of a step in Fig- ure 16 are summarized in Table1 . The con guration at the beginning of the step is de ned by the set fA; Cg, assuming that I = fxg.... In PAGE 28: ...ature of the step construction (i.e., the selection of the transition to put in T is made non- deterministically), there are (in this case) three di erent ways of constructing a step; two constructions yielding di erent results are illustrated in the table. The behavior de ned in construction 1 in Table1 is counterintuitive since transition t4, which should \obviously quot; be triggered by the input event x, is not taken. The semantics of RSML is slightly di erent and enforces a more rigorous causal ordering of the transitions taken within a step.... ..."

### Table 1: Two possible step constructions in Statecharts

"... In PAGE 28: ... The function NextConfig calculates the new state con guration given the old state con guration C and the set of transitions T . The possible constructions of a step in Fig- ure 16 are summarized in Table1 . The con guration at the beginning of the step is de ned by the set fA; Cg, assuming that I = fxg.... In PAGE 28: ...ature of the step construction (i.e., the selection of the transition to put in T is made non- deterministically), there are (in this case) three di erent ways of constructing a step; two constructions yielding di erent results are illustrated in the table. The behavior de ned in construction 1 in Table1 is counterintuitive since transition t4, which should \obviously quot; be triggered by the input event x, is not taken. The semantics of RSML is slightly di erent and enforces a more rigorous causal ordering of the transitions taken within a step.... ..."

### TABLE I TWO POSSIBLE STEP CONS rRUCTlONS IN STATECHARTS Construction 1

1994

Cited by 197

### Table 1. Classification steps of all the possible types authentication

2000

Cited by 2

### Table 1. All possible action specializations in the first step

### Table 1. Classification steps of all the possible types authentication

### Table VII. Minimum simulation time step possible with the airplane-landing simulator.

### Table 6.2: Comparison of maximum possible time step vs. computation time for various initial value problem solvers. The maximum possible time step is chosen as high as possible while the simulation still stays stable. The relative performance is based on the ratio between time step and computation time but is scaled such that the highest ratio equals 100%. timestep [ms] comp. time [ms] ratio rel. perf. [%]

2006

### Table 1. Step 1. Availability Matrix: Possible assignments (preprocessing/reduction rules), 0: no assignment possible, 1: possible assignment, 2: specialization.

"... In PAGE 4: ....5 3.8 4.1 4.1 4.6 4.9 4.9 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 5.7 0 Table 4. Step 3 Construction Overall Schedule Crash: only special: first still available Greedy: use combinations, see Table 2 Marriage Problem: ordering assignments, see Table1 , forbidden combinations are needed Optimisation: as much as possible combinations (ILP) Always assign just one of the alternative combinations or a part of one combination. Crash Greedy Marriage Optimize 2 1 madMK4A OR 1 2 2.... ..."