"... In PAGE 7: ... The lookup/read-write cache helps eliminates unnecessary calls when doing read and write operations. 8 Observed performance Table1 shows performance numbers for a number of sample user-level applications. The measurements include the kernel based implementation NFS, a single slice Bigfoot file system, and a number of multi-slice Bigfoot file systems.... ..."

"... In PAGE 7: ... The lookup/read-write cache helps eliminates unnecessary calls when doing read and write operations. 8 Observed performance Table1 shows performance numbers for a number of sample user-level applications. The measurements include the kernel based implementation NFS, a single slice Bigfoot file system, and a number of multi-slice Bigfoot file systems.... ..."

"... In PAGE 3: ...2 Accuracy For PET to MRI registration, median errors using no thresholding, coincidence, and standard thresholding are given in Table 2. Maximum errors are presented in Table3 . For details on the assessment method consult [3].... In PAGE 3: ...iven in Table 2. Maximum errors are presented in Table 3. For details on the assessment method consult [3]. Median registration errors do not reveal significant differences between the three methods. Considering maximum errors ( Table3 ), coincidence thresholding gave the best results in three out of six categories (PET non-rectified MRI) and was always close to the respective optimum in the remaining three cases. Maximum errors for CT to various MRI registrations are given in Table 4.... ..."

"... In PAGE 5: ... Based on an average reconstruction time of 30 sec- onds, this search takes about 45 hours. The results are presented in Table2 which shows the optimal views for K = {1,2,3,4,5} and the correspond- ing minimum average reconstruction errors (refer to Table 1 Figure 7. Reconstruction errors for all view con- figurations with 4 cameras (K = 4) ranked by magnitude of ensemble error.... In PAGE 5: ... Figure 7 shows the errors of all combinatorial view configurations for the case K = 4, ranked in ascending order of error. Each er- ror bar represents the subjects standard deviation for that configuration (the first error bar corresponds to the optimal configuration and is the subject standard deviation listed in Table2 ). Other plots for K = 1,2,3 and 5 are quite sim- ilar in nature, all showing a well-defined minimum with the subject variation (error-bars) being lowest for the best configuration (left most) and highest for the worst (right most).... In PAGE 5: ... Using the same search strategy, we now evaluate the visual hull constructions ob- tained from the given subset of silhouette images and com- pare them to the ground truth. Table 3 shows the optimal views for K = {2,3,4,5} and the corresponding error val- ues (same format as in Table2 except that the visual hull from a single silhouette (K = 1) has no finite volume and... In PAGE 6: ... There are a few dif- ferences but these are somewhat misleading. The best view configurations in Table2 are marked in Figure 8 with ar- rows. We note that our model-based optimal views have al- most the same errors as the best views chosen with visual hull method and are always in the first plateau or top quar- tile that includes the key profile view #10.... ..."