Results 1 - 10
of
126,076
Table 3. Prediction performance for uploaded and downloaded traffic. The data was collected from 2002-12-14 to 2002-12-20.
"... In PAGE 7: ... We used the S-PLUS [17] maximum likelihood and forecast function to obtain the parameter estimation and forecast [18]. Results are shown in Table3 and Figure 8. They indicate that the predictor cannot capture the bursts of the downloaded traffic, while it is successful in capturing the uploaded traffic.... ..."
Table 3. Prediction performance for uploaded and downloaded traffic. The data was collected from 2002-12-14 to 2002-12-20.
"... In PAGE 7: ... We used the S-PLUS [17] maximum likelihood and forecast function to obtain the parameter estimation and forecast [18]. Results are shown in Table3 and Figure 8. They indicate that the predictor cannot capture the bursts of the downloaded traffic, while it is successful in capturing the uploaded traffic.... ..."
Table 2. From the semantic, visual, camera Index to the ToC. shot id 0 2 10 12 14 31 33
2004
"... In PAGE 24: ... The video streams are MPEG compressed, with the digitization rate equal to 30 frames/s. Table2 summarizes example results over the video clip Movie1. The flrst two rows are an example of going from the semantic Index (e.... In PAGE 25: ...916 By just looking at each isolated Index alone, a user usually cannot understand the context. By going from the Index to the ToC or Highlights (as in Table2 and Fig. 16), a user quickly learns when and under which circumstances (e.... In PAGE 25: ...earns when and under which circumstances (e.g., within a particular scene) that Index entity is happening. Table2 summarizes how to go from the Index to the ToC to flnd the context. We can also go from the ToC or the Highlights to the Index to pinpoint a speciflc Index.... ..."
Cited by 2
Table VIIIb. Operating systems in 2002.
2002
Cited by 4
Table 5: Performance Comparison between [12] and [14]. System Processing Elements Performance CLK
"... In PAGE 4: ... That implies writing sev- eral nucleotides in a single bus write- cycle. The results from Table5 show that their Virtex2 implementation is the fastest in terms of CUPS (Cell Updates Per Second). In [13] a concept to accelerate the S-W algorithm on the bases linear systolic array is demonstrated.... In PAGE 5: ... The implementation was successfully veri ed using on Pilchard (a recon gurable computing platform), which provides a 133 MHz, 64-bit wide memory mapped bus to the FPGA. Table5 gives a performance comparison between [12] and [14], where the performance is measured in billion cell updates per second (BCUPS). It is obvious from Table 5, that the Virtex 2 implementation in [12] outperforms other implementations in terms of BCUPS.... ..."
Table 2. Questions for the participants and results. Note that participants on questions 10 and 12 to 14 significantly favored the optical system.
Table 2: Bounds (10), (12), (14), (24), and (26) for Examples 4, 5, 6, and 14.
"... In PAGE 20: ... A Comparison In this appendix we tabulate a brief comparison of some of the upper and lower bounds derived in the body of this paper. Table2 reports bounds (10), (12), (14), (15), (24), and (26) for Examples 4, 5, 6, and the following engineering application. Example 14 The simpli ed, linearized model of a two-dimensional, three-link mobile manipulator derived in [25] is a linear, time invariant descriptor control system E _ x = Ax + Bu y = Cx: The explicit data listed in [25] are E = 2 4 I3 0 0 0 M0 0 0 0 0 3 5 ; A = 2 4 0 I3 0 ?K0 ?D0 FT 0 F0 0 0 3 5 ; B = 2 4 0 S0 0 3 5 ; and C = 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 5 ; where M0 = 2 4 18:7532 ?7:94493 7:94494 ?7:94493 31:8182 ?26:8182 7:94494 ?26:8182 26:8182 3 5 ; D0 = 2 4 ?1:52143 ?1:55168 1:55168 3:22064 3:28467 ?3:28467 ?3:22064 ?3:28467 3:28467 3 5 ; K0 = 2 4 67:4894 69:2393 ?69:2393 69:8124 1:68624 ?1:68617 ?69:8123 ?1:68617 ?68:2707 3 5 ; S0 = 2 4 ?0:216598 ?:033806 0:554659 0:458506 ?0:845154 0:386648 ?:458506 0:845153 0:613353 3 5 ; F0 = 1 0 0 0 0 1 : For Table 2 we applied the bounds to (A; E) for the open-loop pencil A ? E.... In PAGE 20: ... Table 2 reports bounds (10), (12), (14), (15), (24), and (26) for Examples 4, 5, 6, and the following engineering application. Example 14 The simpli ed, linearized model of a two-dimensional, three-link mobile manipulator derived in [25] is a linear, time invariant descriptor control system E _ x = Ax + Bu y = Cx: The explicit data listed in [25] are E = 2 4 I3 0 0 0 M0 0 0 0 0 3 5 ; A = 2 4 0 I3 0 ?K0 ?D0 FT 0 F0 0 0 3 5 ; B = 2 4 0 S0 0 3 5 ; and C = 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 5 ; where M0 = 2 4 18:7532 ?7:94493 7:94494 ?7:94493 31:8182 ?26:8182 7:94494 ?26:8182 26:8182 3 5 ; D0 = 2 4 ?1:52143 ?1:55168 1:55168 3:22064 3:28467 ?3:28467 ?3:22064 ?3:28467 3:28467 3 5 ; K0 = 2 4 67:4894 69:2393 ?69:2393 69:8124 1:68624 ?1:68617 ?69:8123 ?1:68617 ?68:2707 3 5 ; S0 = 2 4 ?0:216598 ?:033806 0:554659 0:458506 ?0:845154 0:386648 ?:458506 0:845153 0:613353 3 5 ; F0 = 1 0 0 0 0 1 : For Table2 we applied the bounds to (A; E) for the open-loop pencil A ? E.... In PAGE 21: ...Table 2: Bounds (10), (12), (14), (24), and (26) for Examples 4, 5, 6, and 14. In Table2 , the bound (14) requires a choice of Q and Z in the generalized Schur decomposition. For Examples 4, 5, and 6 we used Q = Z = I, because in these three examples E and A are already upper triangular.... ..."
Results 1 - 10
of
126,076