### Table 3 : Case = 1 ; comparison of our results obtained using model M1 with the corresponding results of Kisselev{Petrov[18] and that obtained using the Novikov[20] equation in the standard way.

### Table 2 Capital Requirements Against Market Risk Calculated in Three Different Ways, and the Standard Approacha

"... In PAGE 13: ...73 Comparison of the standard and internal models Table2 gives the results of the calculation of the capital requirement for market risks (by means of an internal model) obtained from calculating VaR by the three methods (historical simulation, variance-covariance matrix, and Monte Carlo simulation). For purposes of comparison, the standard capital requirement, calculated in accordance with the instructions of the Basle Committee of 1996, is also presented.... In PAGE 13: ...7 to 2.8 percent of the value of the portfolio (Figure 1 and Table2 ). This finding was expected, as the standard capital requirement is based on a conservative and rough estimate, reflecting the attitude of the authorities to dealing with risks.... ..."

### Table 8: A standard four-fold table for two-way prediction of rows by columns.

### Table 4.2: Delays, calculated distance and deviation versus real distance. actual remote local one-way calculated standard

2004

### TABLE 9 One-Way ANOVA of Selected Variables by Food Security Status (Mean and Standard Error of the Mean)

2000

Cited by 1

### Table 1 presents the rules of a generic free variable semantic tableau calculus. Starting from the initial tableau for a given closed formula of L+ , such rules allow to prolongate tableau branches in the standard way, as described for instance in [9]. We also refer the reader to [9] for all related basic notions, such as those of closed branch, closed tableau, satis able tableau, etc. The -, -, and -rules are the standard ones, so they deserve no further explanation. Concerning the -rule, we will characterize its proviso in such a way as to enforce soundness and encompass the -rule variants present in literature that de ne Skolem terms in a syntactical way.

"... In PAGE 32: ...47 10.81 Table1 . Complexity of the Case Studies... In PAGE 33: ... The last two examples contain mutually recursive operators. Table1 illustrates the complexity of the examples. It contains the number of lemmas (constant for all heuristics), and, for our novel heuristics with mandatory and obligatory literals, the number of manual interactions (manually applied inference rules + manually chosen induction order), the number of automatically applied inference rules (including the later deleted ones), the number of deleted inference rules due to a failed relief test and the runtime in seconds measured by a CMU Common Lisp system on a machine with a 1330 MHz AMD processor and 512 MB RAM.... In PAGE 60: ... - The term f( !S ) in the -rule is computed by a given function S (T ;m;n), where T is the current tableau, m is the index of the branch to be expanded, and n is the position of the -formula to be instantiated. Table1 . Tableau rules for a generic calculus.... In PAGE 61: ... We indicate with sko = (P; F [ sko) the augmented signature and with L sko the language over sko. The Skolem term f( !S ) in the -rule in Table1 consists of a function symbol f 2 sko of arity n 0 and an n-tuple !S of terms in L+ sko, whose variables belong to Var+. In general, the constraints that f( !S ) must satisfy may depend on the current tableau T , on the branch which is about to be expanded, and on the -formula on that is about to be instantiated.... In PAGE 62: ... Then we put: S (T ; m; n) =Def f( !H ) : (1) Section 4 illustrates how to apply our generic -rule to show the correctness of some -rules in literature. But before doing that, we will show that the tableau calculus described in Table1 is sound, provided that its associated Skolem terms construction rule satis es the above conditions C1-C8. It will be enough to show that tableau satis ability is preserved by the ex- pansion rules in Table 1 and substitution applications.... In PAGE 62: ... But before doing that, we will show that the tableau calculus described in Table 1 is sound, provided that its associated Skolem terms construction rule satis es the above conditions C1-C8. It will be enough to show that tableau satis ability is preserved by the ex- pansion rules in Table1 and substitution applications. To this purpose, it is convenient to stratify the language L+ sko, and then show how we can expand a given structure for L+ to a canonical structure for L+ sko.... In PAGE 64: ...Soundness of the generic -rule We are now ready to show that the tableau calculus in Table1 is sound, provided that the Skolem terms construction rule is de ned as in (1) and conditions C1- C8 hold. This will plainly be entailed by the following theorem.... In PAGE 64: ...t. Let A be an assignment in Msko. By the inductive hypothesis there exists a branch on T such that (Msko; A) j= . Let T 0 be the tableau resulting from an application of one of the expansion rules in Table1 or from an application of a substitution to T . If T 0 = T , then it can be shown that Msko satis es T 0 (cf.... In PAGE 84: ... f:(memb(C, A)), :(memb(C, B)), memb(C, intersect(A, B))g. Table1 . Timing and clauses of OSHL, Otter, Vampire, E-SETHEO and DCTP on set of theorems [-1-left for various values of n.... ..."

### Table 1: Specifications for the Seagate ST43401N Elite-3 SCSI Disk Drive. Average seek in this table is calculated assuming a uniform distribution of accesses. This is the standard way manufacturers report average seek times. In reality, measurements of production systems show that spatial locality significantly lowers the effective average seek distance [Hennessy90, pg. 559].

1994

"... In PAGE 7: ... The seek time and rotational latency are sometimes collectively referred to as the head positioning time. Table1 tabulates the statistics for a typical high-end disk... In PAGE 8: ...5 The slow head positioning time and fast data transfer rate of disks lead to very different per- formance for a sequence of accesses depending on the size and relative location of each access. Suppose we need to transfer 1 MB from the disk in Table1 , and the data is laid out in two ways: sequential within a single cylinder or randomly placed in 8 KB blocks. In either case the time for the actual data transfer of 1 MB is about 200 ms.... ..."

Cited by 272

### Table 1: Specifications for the Seagate ST43401N Elite-3 SCSI Disk Drive. Average seek in this table is calculated assuming a uniform distribution of accesses. This is the standard way manufacturers report average seek times. In reality, measurements of production systems show that spatial locality significantly lowers the effective average seek distance [Hennessy90, pg. 559].

1994

"... In PAGE 7: ... The seek time and rotational latency are sometimes collectively referred to as the head positioning time. Table1 tabulates the statistics for a typical high-end disk available in 1993. The slow head positioning time and fast data transfer rate of disks lead to very different per- formance for a sequence of accesses depending on the size and relative location of each access.... In PAGE 7: ... The slow head positioning time and fast data transfer rate of disks lead to very different per- formance for a sequence of accesses depending on the size and relative location of each access. Suppose we need to transfer 1 MB from the disk in Table1 , and the data is laid out in two ways: sequential within a single cylinder or randomly placed in 8 KB blocks. In either case the time for... ..."

Cited by 272

### Table 1: Specifications for the Seagate ST43401N Elite-3 SCSI Disk Drive. Average seek in this table is calculated assuming a uniform distribution of accesses. This is the standard way manufacturers report average seek times. In reality, measurements of production systems show that spatial locality significantly lowers the effective average seek distance [Hennessy90, pg. 559].

1994

"... In PAGE 7: ... The seek time and rotational latency are sometimes collectively referred to as the head positioning time. Table1 tabulates the statistics for a typical high-end disk available in 1993. The slow head positioning time and fast data transfer rate of disks lead to very different per- formance for a sequence of accesses depending on the size and relative location of each access.... In PAGE 7: ... The slow head positioning time and fast data transfer rate of disks lead to very different per- formance for a sequence of accesses depending on the size and relative location of each access. Suppose we need to transfer 1 MB from the disk in Table1 , and the data is laid out in two ways: sequential within a single cylinder or randomly placed in 8 KB blocks. In either case the time for... ..."

Cited by 272

1994

"... In PAGE 7: ... The seek time and rotational latency are sometimes collectively referred to as the head positioning time. Table1 tabulates the statistics for a typical high-end disk... In PAGE 8: ...5 The slow head positioning time and fast data transfer rate of disks lead to very different per- formance for a sequence of accesses depending on the size and relative location of each access. Suppose we need to transfer 1 MB from the disk in Table1 , and the data is laid out in two ways: sequential within a single cylinder or randomly placed in 8 KB blocks. In either case the time for the actual data transfer of 1 MB is about 200 ms.... ..."

Cited by 272