### Table 1. Entanglement of

2003

"... In PAGE 4: ... Because she knows the initial state of her created qubits i Q and j Q , her result from measuring j Q and k Q , and the state of qubits sent from Tr, Alice can determine the state of the now entangled qubits i Q and l Q . Using the state of i Q and j Q , and the result of her measure of j Q and k Q , the entangled state of i Q and l Q can be determined from Table1... ..."

### Table.1: Tableau for entangled qubit production problem

### Table 2. Average decrease in entanglement h E1i between one qubit and the rest during the IQFT.

2005

"... In PAGE 9: ... In these cases, though we cannot easily calculate a full entanglement analysis, we have calculated the entropy between one qubit and the rest of the qubits in both registers, this corre- sponds to the quantities in the top line of Table 1. The di erence in the average entropy E1 before and after the IQFT (corresponding to the last column in Table 1), is shown in Table2 grouped by the period r. There is a clear pattern for E1: the closer the period r is to a power of 2, the smaller the value of E1.... ..."

### Table 5: Swap Axioms

"... In PAGE 7: ... Swap axioms are applied until a reduction axiom may be applied. Table5 provides the list of swap axioms for the POTS. Table 5: Swap Axioms... ..."

### Table 4 Swap Regressions

"... In PAGE 24: ... 22 4.1 Swap Regression Results Table4 presents our results from estimating interest rate swap regressions. In each specification, in addition to the structural variables we include a linear control for the time period--the month and year (1993 or 1994) in which the firm apos;s balance sheet and derivative position is observed.... ..."

### Table 8: The Swapping Problem

1992

"... In PAGE 16: ...llows only direct concepts (i.e. nodes in the version space) or indirect concepts (i.e. all instances with the exception of those matching one node in the version space). So the SVS algorithm asks too many questions because the user can specify a concept such as i1 and i2, but not i3 and i4 ( Table8 ) or everything but i3 and i4 (but including i1 and i2) (Table 9) which are not expressible as direct or indirect concepts. After classifying i1 and i8 as positive examples and i4 as a negative example, the only consistent concepts in the representation language are everything but i4 and everything but c10 (i.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 9. Swapping and replay

2005

Cited by 2