### Table 1 - The Zipf apos;s exponent , the inverse Zipf apos;s exponent , the words entropy ~ Hw, the frequencies \entropy quot; ~ Hf measured in the natural texts and in the related (see text) arti cial texts of types \1 quot; and \2 quot;. The quantities and ~ Hf seem to be more useful for distinguishing between natural and arti cial texts than the quantities and ~ Hw.

1996

"... In PAGE 8: ...Table1 we give, for each book studied, the total number of words, T , the number of distinct words R, the Zipf apos;s law exponent , the inverse Zipf apos;s law exponent , the words entropy ~ Hw, and the frequencies \entropy quot; ~ Hf, for the three types of texts. The most striking di erence between the natural and the arti cial texts is the ratio R=T , which is the relative amount of distinct words, or, in other words, the vocabulary size of a text.... In PAGE 8: ... This remarkable di erence in vocabulary size is not expressed through the value of the Zipf apos;s law exponent . One can see in Table1 that for both natural and arti cial texts is very close to 1. The average di erence in between the natural texts and the \arti cial 1 quot; texts is 5% and and between the natural texts and the \arti cial 2 quot; texts is 14%.... In PAGE 9: ... The fact that the inverse Zipf analysis is found more useful for distinguishing between natural and arti cial texts suggests that, in general, the analysis of the words apos; frequencies distribution should be more useful in this task than the analysis of words distribution. One can see in Table1 that for both relative entropies, ~ Hw and ~ Hf, there is, consistently, a di erence between the natural and the arti cial texts. The average di erences in ~ Hw between the natural and the arti cial texts of types \1 quot; and \2 quot; are 17% and 20%, respectively, while the di erences in ~ Hf are 410% and 224%.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 2. Signature Algorithms (with signature length).

2007

"... In PAGE 5: ... We have 3 types of algorithms: the signing algorithm of the DS certificate; the signature algorithm of DS for the SOD; the signature algorithm in the active authentication. What we have seen is reported on Table2 . For instance, Switzerland uses ECDSA over P-256 (aka secp256r1 [15,33]) to sign the SOD.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 4: Signature for Prompts.

1995

"... In PAGE 7: ... 5 Implementation To complete the argument that prompts and cupto are sim- pler and easier to use than callcc, we show that the cupto can be implemented as e ciently (in an asymptotic sense) as callcc. Our operations|including multiple prompts|can be im- plemented as a module in SML/NJ with the signature in Table4 . Other implementations of functional continuation operators appear in the literature: for instance, Filinski [6] shows how to encode control operators with callcc and one reference cell under the assumption that there is one prompt.... ..."

Cited by 40

### Table 4: Signature for Prompts.

1995

"... In PAGE 7: ... 5 Implementation To complete the argument that prompts and cupto are sim- pler and easier to use than callcc, we show that the cupto can be implemented as e ciently (in an asymptotic sense) as callcc. Our operations|including multiple prompts|can be im- plemented as a module in SML/NJ with the signature in Table4 . Other implementations of functional continuation operators appear in the literature: for instance, Filinski [6] shows how to encode control operators with callcc and one reference cell under the assumption that there is one prompt.... ..."

Cited by 40

### Table 1 Signature element

"... In PAGE 5: ...5.1 Signature element Table1 specifies the required level of each constituent element of XML signature. The required level shall be quot;Conditional quot; for any elements not listed in Table 1.... In PAGE 5: ...5.2 Object element, SignedProperties element, UnsignedProperties element Table1 specifies the required level of each constituent element of XML signature. The required level shall be quot;Conditional quot; for any elements not listed in Table 1.... In PAGE 6: ...ote 1 Mandatory in ETSI TS 101 903 v1.1.1. 2 Either SigningCertificate or ds: KeyInfo ( Table1 ) is required. Table 4 UnsignedProperties element Element Required level UnsignedSignatureProperties M CounterSignature O Trusted signing time M SignatureTimeStamp O Time mark or other method c UnsignedDataObjectProperties c 5.... In PAGE 10: ...ote 1 Mandatory in ETSI TS 101 903 v1.1.1. 2 Either SigningCertificate or ds: KeyInfo ( Table1 ) is required. Table A.... ..."

### Table 1: Example signatures.

1999

"... In PAGE 10: ...vides an external sorter and s#0Co supports 64- bit #0Cles, making these two libraries particu- larly useful in addressing issues of scale. 7 Early experiences Table1 brie#0Dy describes four signatures: Usage, Frequency, Activity, and Bizocity. These signatures are computed daily from call records.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 2. Path Signatures

2001

"... In PAGE 5: ... Therefore, the path signature a6 a33 a29 of each node a31 in M(a12 a22 ) is a6 a33 a29 = a83 (x a47 y) a85 a6 a33 a29 is the path signature of a state node in M(a12 a22 ), x is an element of a6 a33 a29 , y is an element of a6 a33a11a94a73a84 Example 5.2 (Path Signatures in NFA) After applying the rules, we can obtain the path signature of each node in s-NFA, and the results are shown in Table2 . For example, a6 a33a5a22a66a106 is a83 10001001 a84 which is the ORing value between hash values of company and name because the edge company and name has to be visited in order to arrive at the final state from state node 10.... ..."

Cited by 4

### Table 4: Signature for Prompts.

1998

"... In PAGE 20: ... ] 6 Implementation To complete the argument that prompts and cupto are simpler and easier to use than callcc, we show that the cupto can be implemented as e ciently (in an asymptotic sense) as callcc. Our operations|including multiple prompts|can be implemented as a module in SML/NJ with the signature in Table4 . Other implementations of functional continuation operators appear in the literature: for instance, Filinski [6] shows how to encode control operators with callcc and one reference cell under the assumption that there is one prompt.... ..."

Cited by 1