### Table 1: The predicted abundance of DLA systems, n(z), for a variety of cosmological models. =(3H2 0) where is the cosmological constant. References for model normalizations are listed below. The nal row shows observed data and 1 errors.

"... In PAGE 5: ... 3. Results Table1 compares the predicted numbers of DLA absorbers to the observational results reported by Storrie-Lombardi et al. (1996).... In PAGE 7: ...he dotted error crosses (1 ) are taken from Wolfe et al. (1995). The heavy curves connecting z = 2; 3; 4 are values calculated for each model. The model names correspond to the names in Table1... ..."

### Table 1. Bounds on cosmological variation of fundamental constants of non- gravitational physics. For references to earlier work, see TEGP 2.4(c).

1984

"... In PAGE 13: ... If LPI is satis ed, the fundamental constants of non-gravitational physics should be constants in time. Table1 shows current bounds on cosmological variations in selected dimensionless constants.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1. Bounds on cosmological variation of fundamental constants of non- gravitational physics. For references to earlier work, see TEGP 2.4(c).

1984

"... In PAGE 12: ... If LPI is satis ed, the fundamental constants of non-gravitational physics should be constants in time. Table1 shows current bounds on cosmological variations in selected dimensionless... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1 shows current bounds on cosmological variations in selected dimensionless constants. For discussion and references to early work, see TEGP 2.4(c).

1984

Cited by 1

### Table 1: Model values of cosmological parameters

1998

"... In PAGE 7: ... We consider here ve models, standard cold dark matter model (SCDM), open SCDM (OSCDM), the CDM model with cosmolog- ical constant ( CDM), open CDM (O CDM), and open CDM (OCDM). The model values of the cosmological parameters are shown in Table1 . The C2 values in Table 1 are obtained by normalizing all ve models to the COBE four-year data, following Bunn amp; White (1997).... In PAGE 23: ...are known to be that of the SCDM model (with A2 S(k) = 1) listed in Table1 . (a) MAP only.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1: The predicted abundance of DLA systems, n(z), for a variety of cosmological models. =(3H2 0 ) where is the cosmological constant. References for model normalizations are listed below. The nal row shows observed data and 1 errors. aBunn amp; White (1996) bWhite et al. (1996) cCen et al. (1994), Kofman, Gnedin, amp; Bahcall (1993) dGorksi et al. (1996) eMa (1996) fStorrie-Lombardi et al. (1996)

"... In PAGE 5: ... 3. Results Table1 compares the predicted numbers of DLA absorbers to the observational results reported by Storrie-Lombardi et al. (1996).... In PAGE 7: ...he dotted error crosses (1 ) are taken from Wolfe et al. (1995). The heavy curves connecting z = 2; 3; 4 are values calculated for each model. The model names correspond to the names in Table1... ..."

### Table 3. SN Ia rate per unit comoving volume for di erent cosmological models: in a at dominated model consistent with the latest Supernova Cosmology Project results (Model ); in a = 0 universe with M = 0:3 (Model O); and in an Einstein-de-Sitter universe (Model E).

in Accepted for publication in The Astrophysical Journal LPNHE 02-02 The distant Type Ia supernova rate

2002

"... In PAGE 9: ... At z = 0:5, the comoving volume element in a at universe with = 0:7 is twice that in a at universe with no cosmological constant. Table3 gives the results of the ts for di erent values of M and . For a spatially- at cosmological model with M = 0:28 as measured by the SCP (Perlmutter et al.... In PAGE 10: ... As before, we perform maximum likelihood ts for a choice of cosmological models. The results are reported in Table3 . As expected, the evolution parameter , depends strongly on the assumed cosmology.... ..."

### Table 1: Evidence for various cosmological models and combinations of experimental results, as marked. We also show the odds ratios for the combined dataset. HST CFHT SNIa

"... In PAGE 5: ...rom Eq. (13) it is clear that this occurs at the maximum attainable value of f( ; ). For any one of our theories, then, the most favored values of the parameters occurs where f is largest; hence the preference for universe dominated by curvature ( = 0) or a cosmological constant ( = 1), at least as far as these data alone.The integral over the posterior needed for setting the odds is given in Table1 , for each combination of experimental result and model; the odds comparing to models for a given set of data are just the ratios of the entries in the table. The \best t quot; model is + = 1 irrespective of the particular experiment considered; the worst is the simplest with = 1.... In PAGE 6: ...) We must also decide on what to use as our prior distribution for and |in the light of which model or combination of models will we consider the data? For example, if we only consider = 1, = 0, the more strongly the data disfavor f = 2=3, the smaller the evidence. In Table1 , we show the evidence for each of our models individually, as well as the combination of models 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 apos;, each weighted equally, all for each possible combination of datasets. Note that combining models inevitably decreases the evidence, because the quadrature combination of datasets decreases the e ective error in the Hubble constant measurement, H, thereby decreasing the width of the step in the likelihood for f.... ..."

### Table 1. GIF Simulations

"... In PAGE 6: ... The two models we consider here are a at model with or without a cosmological constant: 0 = 0:3 and = 0:7 ( CDM) and 0 = 1 ( CDM). Table1 sum- marizes the parameters of these models. Kau mann et al.... ..."

### Table 1. Simulation Parameters. From left to right: the cos- mological mass-density parameter , the Hubble constant h H0=(100km s?1 Mpc?1), the linear rms mass density in a sphere of radius 8h?1 Mpc 8, the box size L, and the mass per particle, mp.

"... In PAGE 3: ... The simula- tions have Np = 2563 particles and 512 cells on a side, and a gravitational softening length of 30h?1 kpc (h H0=(100 kms?1 Mpc?1)). Here we analyze only two of the four cosmological models simulated for the GIF project (see Table1 ). One model, CDM, has = 1 and the other, CDM, has = 0:3 and a cosmological constant = 0:7.... ..."