### TABLE I WORST-CASE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT.

### Table 2: The average-, best-, and worst-case performance bounds of the ow analyzer. Flow Performance

"... In PAGE 21: ... For each switch matrix, we analyzed its routability by the ow analyzer and the ILP analyzer used in [23] based on 100 randomly generated RRV apos;s. The results are shown in Table2 and Figure 11. Table 2 gives the average-, best-, and worst-case performance bounds for each W.... ..."

### Table 3. Compared worst-case performance of static cache locking and static cache analysis

in Cache Analysis Vs Static Cache Locking for Schedulability Analysis in Multitasking Real-Time Systems

"... In PAGE 4: ...2.2 Worst-case performance analysis The worst-case system performance of the considered task set is given in Table3 . Each cell indicates whether the task set is feasible or not according to CRTA (equation 3, de- tailed in [4]).... ..."

### Table 3: Worst-case performance of memory deallocation (nb. of processor cycles)

2002

"... In PAGE 15: ... 4.2 Real-time performance of memory deallocation Table3 gives the worst-case deallocation times measured on the mpg123 and synthetic workloads, as well as the worst-case deallocation times obtained analytically.... ..."

Cited by 3

### Table 1: Worst-case bounds on performance degradation for LRU algorithm

1998

Cited by 19

### Table 1: Worst-case performance improvement. Graph Total Requests Routed by Factor of

"... In PAGE 8: ...1 Worst-Case Analysis In this flrst comparison, we revisit the three topologies (PL, CN, and DS) from Section 4 and infer the worst-case be- havior of shortest-path, WSP, MIRA, and PBR on these topologies without simulation. Table1 documents these re- sults. In the PL topology, if the flrst request is between nodes S0 and D0, then all greedy algorithms (shortest path, WSP, SWP, and MIRA) accept it, which blocks all future requests from being routed.... ..."

### Table 4: Worst-case performance ratios of the SDP-MVC algorithm for k 0:40n

2001

"... In PAGE 31: ...Table4 , which shows R( ; ; ) for 0:4n k 0:98n. Again note that the true performance ratio R k for MVC should be greater than R( ; ; ) of the table.... ..."

### Table 1: Worst-case performance ratios of the SDP-DSP algorithm

2001

"... In PAGE 21: ... 2( ; ? ) = ; ? (1 + )2=4 = 2((1 + )2=4 ? ) 2(( 1 + 2) ? ) + (1 + )2=4 ? ( 1 + 2): This completes the proof. We have calculated Table1 , which shows R( ; ; ) for 0:2n k 0:9995n. Note that the true performance ratio R k for DSP should be greater than R( ; ; ) shown in the table.... ..."

### Table 2: Worst-case performance ratios of the SDP-MC algorithm

2001

"... In PAGE 24: ... 0 1 ? : R4( ; ; ) = ( 2q ( ; ? ) + ? if q ; ? 1, minf ; (1 ? ); ; (0)g otherwise. Then, we have R( ; ; ) = minfR1( ; ; ); R2( ; ; ); R3( ; ; ); R4( ; ; )g: We have generated Table2 , which shows R( ; ; ) for 0:5n k 0:98n. Note that the true performance ratio R k for MC should be greater than R( ; ; ) of the table, and R( ; ; ) for 0:5n k 0:02n are identical to those shown here.... ..."

### Table 3: Worst-case performance ratios of the SDP-MNC algorithm

2001

"... In PAGE 28: ...R4( ; ; ) = ( 2 ? (? + )2 4( ; ? ) + if 2( ; ? ) ? 1, minf ; (1 ? ); 2 ; (0)g otherwise. Again, R( ; ; ) = minfR1( ; ; ); R2( ; ; ); R3( ; ; ); R4( ; ; )g: We have generated Table3 , which shows R( ; ; ) for 0:5n k 0:98n. Note that the true performance ratio R k for MC should be greater than R( ; ; ) of the table, and R( ; ; ) for 0:5n k 0:02n are identical to those displayed here.... ..."