"... In PAGE 30: ...2.2 The output combinations of the P00 sub-factory The list of the output combinations used by the P00 sub-factory is given in Table10 . This list includes all the combinations that involve the outcomes Q4 0, Q6 2 and Q10 6 of the extended balanced P00 grafting and the outcomes R0 4, R1 3, R2 6, R6 10 and R4 4 of the unbalanced P00 grafting.... In PAGE 30: ... This is due to the fact that the input constructs to the P00 sub-factory carry (positive) credits while the inputs to the (P0; P00) sub-factory do not, and due to the fact that the e ective pruning costs pr0 0(W0) apos; 1:4366 ? 1+ 2 credit(P00) apos; 1:2366 and pr0 1(W0) apos; 1:6268 ? 1+ 2 credit(P00) apos; 1:4267 in the P00 sub-factory are lower than the pruning costs pr0(W) = pr1(W) = 1:5 of the (P0; P00) sub-factory. It is therefore enough to analyse the costs of the combinations listed in Table10 . We present, as examples, the analyses of combinations 3 and 7 which, together with combinations 2,3 and 7 of the (P0; P00)... ..."

"... In PAGE 30: ...2.2 The output combinations of the P00 sub-factory The list of the output combinations used by the P00 sub-factory is given in Table10 . This list includes all the combinations that involve the outcomes Q4 0, Q6 2 and Q10 6 of the extended balanced P00 grafting and the outcomes R0 4, R1 3, R2 6, R6 10 and R4 4 of the unbalanced P00 grafting.... In PAGE 30: ... This is due to the fact that the input constructs to the P00 sub-factory carry (positive) credits while the inputs to the (P0; P00) sub-factory do not, and due to the fact that the e ective pruning costs pr0 0(W0) apos; 1:4366 ? 1+ 2 credit(P00) apos; 1:2366 and pr0 1(W0) apos; 1:6268 ? 1+ 2 credit(P00) apos; 1:4267 in the P00 sub-factory are lower than the pruning costs pr0(W) = pr1(W) = 1:5 of the (P0; P00) sub-factory. It is therefore enough to analyse the costs of the combinations listed in Table10 . We present, as examples, the analyses of combinations 3 and 7 which, together with combinations 2,3 and 7 of the (P0; P00)... ..."

"... In PAGE 30: ...2.2 The output combinations of the P00 sub-factory The list of the output combinations used by the P00 sub-factory is given in Table10 . This list includes all the combinations that involve the outcomes Q4 0, Q6 2 and Q10 6 of the extended balanced P00 grafting and the outcomes R0 4, R1 3, R2 6, R6 10 and R4 4 of the unbalanced P00 grafting.... In PAGE 30: ... This is due to the fact that the input constructs to the P00 sub-factory carry (positive) credits while the inputs to the (P0; P00) sub-factory do not, and due to the fact that the e ective pruning costs pr0 0(W0) apos; 1:4366 ? 1+ 2 credit(P00) apos; 1:2366 and pr0 1(W0) apos; 1:6268 ? 1+ 2 credit(P00) apos; 1:4267 in the P00 sub-factory are lower than the pruning costs pr0(W) = pr1(W) = 1:5 of the (P0; P00) sub-factory. It is therefore enough to analyse the costs of the combinations listed in Table10 . We present, as examples, the analyses of combinations 3 and 7 which, together with combinations 2,3 and 7 of the (P0; P00)... ..."

"... In PAGE 8: ...Table 2. Worst-case Execution Times For the purposes of this example, suppose that using worst case analysis based on default timing behaviour for the target architecture, the execution times shown in Table2 are computed for the statements. Suppose further that the user speci es the task switching overhead to be 5 time units.... ..."

"... In PAGE 3: ... This match is then veri ed by calculating the transformation parameters and applying them to the patterns. 4 Comparisons Table1 is a feature comparison of the abovemen- tioned techniques. We de ne three levels of capability for PPM techniques: Matching: These techniques nd a one-to-one map- ping between the points of two point patterns P and Q, where jPj = jQj = n.... ..."

"... In PAGE 4: ... Table1 summarises the temporal costs of the worst-case allocation and deal- location of these algorithms Table 1. Worst-case costs... ..."

"... In PAGE 7: ... A similar approach is described in [3]. Using the methods described in the literature mentioned above, we gained most of the information for the worst-case prediction, which is outlined in Table1 , the seek curve, and the physical disk layout. The distributions of the request ser- vice times for the two disks are shown in Figure 4.... ..."

"... In PAGE 8: ... 6. Typical P-NET Frame Table1 gives the worst-case duration of the token holding time (H) in P-NET, with the explicit weight of the different contributing components. Table 1.... ..."

"... In PAGE 8: ... 6. Typical P-NET Frame Table1 gives the worst-case duration of the token holding time (H) in P-NET, with the explicit weight of the different contributing components. Table 1.... ..."

"... In PAGE 7: ... A similar approach is described in [3]. Using the methods described in the literature mentioned above, we gained most of the information for the worst-case prediction, which is outlined in Table1 , the seek curve, and the physical disk layout. The distributions of the request ser- vice times for the two disks are shown in Figure 4.... ..."