### Table 3: Distortion coef cients of simulated cameras.

"... In PAGE 4: ... In this experiment, ve types of cameras were simulated, each corresponding to a different distortion characteristic consisting of the rst a89 low-order radial distortion terms with or without the two decentering distortions, Ra89 (a89 = 1, 2) and Ra89 D2 (a89 = 1, 2, 3). The simulated coef cients were chosen from empirical data and are listed in Table3 . All the remaining camera parameters were the same as previ- ously described.... ..."

### Table 5: Regression coef cients for LPA

2005

Cited by 1

### Table 6: Regression coef cients for False Positives

2005

Cited by 1

### Table 1. Filters coef cients computation procedure.

### Table 8. Effect of number of 1lter coef1cients Filter coef1cient MSBAE Improvement Maximum

"... In PAGE 9: ...8 Effect of Number of Filter Coefficients In this experiment we increased the filter coefficients of Daubechies filter from 2 to 8. From Table8 it follows that as we increase the number of coefficients there is an im- provement in MSBAE but there is a degradation in queue performance. 4.... ..."

### Table 1. Coef cients for the separable low-pass lter L(!).

"... In PAGE 2: ... Fig. 4 compares the frequency response of the low-pass lter L(!) with its coef cients in Table1 to that of the 9/7 biorthogonal lter H(!). Fig.... In PAGE 3: ...iven for reference. 9/7 wavelet and low-pass L(!) are used. biorthogonal lters. Finally, the lifted pyramid uses for all down- and upsampling lters the low-pass L(!) with the coef cients in Table1 . Again, the Laplacian pyramid in Fig.... ..."

### Table 1. Coef cients for the separable low-pass lter L(!).

"... In PAGE 2: ... Fig. 4 compares the frequency response of the low-pass lter L(!) with its coef cients in Table1 to that of the 9/7 biorthogonal lter H(!). Fig.... In PAGE 3: ...iven for reference. 9/7 wavelet and low-pass L(!) are used. biorthogonal lters. Finally, the lifted pyramid uses for all down- and upsampling lters the low-pass L(!) with the coef cients in Table1 . Again, the Laplacian pyramid in Fig.... ..."

### Table 1 Coef cients cn;i of n(x)

"... In PAGE 2: ... One should note that the polynomials n(u) have not a literal expression (intractable problem: the evaluation of (7), for a given (nT ; nR), exhibits many cancellation of terms); however, it is not necessary because the polynomials in (8) are directly extracted from (7). These coef cients of n(u) are given in Table1 for some (nT ; nR) couples. From (7), let us nd the possible highest polynomial degree given by Q = 2 Pm 1 i=0 ki + m nS = m(m 1 + nS).... In PAGE 2: ... From (7), let us nd the possible highest polynomial degree given by Q = 2 Pm 1 i=0 ki + m nS = m(m 1 + nS). However, the summation over k allows numerous simpli cations, and then the effective maximum degree Dn is less than Q as shown in Table1 . One can verify that Dn is given by (nT + nR)n + (n + 1)n and the smallest degree is nS [4].... ..."

### Table 4. Error and e ectivity indices for the discontinuous coef- cient example.

2000

"... In PAGE 29: ...Thesolution behaves like r0:1 at the origin and thus is barely in H1( ). Due to the large ratio of a1 and a2 the estimator E is underestimating the error by 30% (compare Table4 ). Altogether, this is not that surprising since the equivalence constants are sensitive to the ratio of smallest and largest eigenvalues of A within a star.... ..."

Cited by 7

### Table 2: The optimum coef cients found for the Catmull- Clark scheme.

2006

Cited by 4