### Table 7: Example 5. Laplace equation on an unbounded domain (Figure 7).

2005

"... In PAGE 22: ... The solution is set to be 1 on the boundary and approaches 0 at infinity. The performance is shown in Table7 . Figure 7(b) shows the potential field on several slices of the domain.... ..."

Cited by 4

### Table 8: Example 6. Stokes equations on an unbounded domain. (Figure 8).

2005

Cited by 4

### Table 4: Example 2. Stokes equations on an unbounded domain with boundary shown in Figure 6(b).

2005

Cited by 4

### Table 5 Unbound Examples.

"... In PAGE 13: ... This gave us a possibility to compare our results with the real-life solution. Table5 lists the names of the docked proteins as well as their crystal resolution. The examples were chosen as large proteins (see Table 6), that have been crystallized both in complex and as separate molecules (unbound proteins).... ..."

### Table 5. Performance of unbounded verification

"... In PAGE 24: ...3 Unbounded verification and attack discovery performance In this last part we present in Table 4 a comparison of the efficiency of finding an attack by the six tools on Needham-Schroeder, for the secrecy properties. Next, we present for the tools which are able to verify protocols for an unbounded number of runs, a comparison of their efficiency for the unbounded verification of correctness of the protocol in Table5... In PAGE 25: ... This includes Scyther, ProVerif and TA4SP, where we have considered only the secrecy properties. We perform this analysis on the four selected pro- tocols, and detail the results in Table5 . With respect to the used notation, we mention that 0.... ..."

### Table 2. Finite and Unbounded Models.

1996

"... In PAGE 4: ...Table2... ..."

Cited by 1

### Tables 1 and 2 show that the larger damping parameter a of the cut-o function yields the better results. However, a should not be too large. Actually, the numerical experiments show that the results are poor for either a lt; 1:0 or a gt; 20:0: Theorem 2 states that the convergence is slow for a larger constant . Tables 1 and 2 support the theory. Throughout this section, the maximum error is computed by comparing the numerical solutions with the true solution at equally spaced 81 points per ele- ment. The maximum relative errors in Tables 1 and 2 are depicted in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 in log-log scale. Finally, let us note that the domain truncating method is not applicable to this problem because the support of f(x) is unbounded.

### Table 2: RSP for Unbounded Start Delay.

1995

"... In PAGE 3: ... This principle was introduced in [4] and has proven to be very useful in system verifications. Specialised to the recursive equation defining the unbounded start delay, RSP instantiates as shown in Table2 . This special form of RSP will be called RSP(USD) in... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 2. Summary Table for the Unbounded Techniques.

2005

"... In PAGE 10: ...t depth 100. Right: X-axis is Interpolation and Y-axis is K-induction. For the unbounded techniques, we set a time limit of 3600 seconds for ver- ification, and measure the number of problems that were resolved within this time limit. Table2 reports the number of resolved problems and average time taken per property. As a baseline, we include the results for a forward traversal BDD-based MC method in Table 2.... In PAGE 10: ... Table 2 reports the number of resolved problems and average time taken per property. As a baseline, we include the results for a forward traversal BDD-based MC method in Table2 . It is interesting to note that all the SAT- based algorithms, except the k-induction method, do better than BDD-based model checking with respect to the number of problems resolved and average time taken.... ..."

Cited by 11