### Table 1: Communication delays for some topologies [86].

"... In PAGE 46: ... 20. For comparison, the communication delay for the basic tasks are summarized in Table1 for all of these topolo- gies. A bus is the simplest static network where processing units are connected in a time-multiplexed manner.... In PAGE 47: ... The connectivity of the tree is as poor as in array, since breaking any one connection results two separate networks, but the flexibility is better. In Table1 , communication delays are given for optimized algorithms for a system with processing units, for which reason single node scatter and multinode broadcast can be accomplished in time . In general, upper bound for both operations is .... In PAGE 48: ... The implementation, however, becomes very complicated as the number of nodes is increased. For comparison, Table1 summarizes communication delays for above topol- ogies [86]. The bus offers best communication delay in single node broad- cast, while the tree and hypercube perform better than mesh and array.... ..."

### Table 4: Generators of the nite primitive irreducible subgroups of SL(5; C)

2001

"... In PAGE 3: ... To construct a matrix representation for a nite group af- fording a given (ordinary) irreducible character we use the method of Dixon explained in [4]. So, given an irreducible primitive unimodular character of degree 5 of a represen- tation group of one the primitive projective subgroups of PGL(5;C) we obtain all the irreducible primitive subgroups of SL(5; C) (numbered from G1 to G11 in Table 5) whose generating matrices are given in Table4 (where i is a prim- itive ith root of unity). Notice that A6 and S6 have 2 non-equivalent irreducible unimodular characters of degree 5 so we get 2 non-equivalent unimodular irreducible matrix representations for them (G3 and G0 3 for A6 and G4 and G0 4 for S6).... In PAGE 8: ...ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are thankful to Juergen Mueller who has computed (us- ing MeatAxe methods) some of the representations presented in Table4 which were \nicer quot; than ours. Thanks to Felix Ulmer for the use of the diagonal form and the constants to get the invariant of the example, and Anne Fredet and Jacques-Arthur Weil for their suggestions and comments.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 4: Comparison among M1, M2, M3 and M4.

1999

"... In PAGE 7: ...4) using the optimization option -O4. In Table4 we find a summary of the comparison between the alternatives M1, M2, M3 and M4 of Perry, Polak-Ribi`ere and Fletcher-Reeves. For example, the first entrance of this table should be read as follows: when comparing the performance of Perry-M1 and Perry-M2, Perry-M1 was better than Perry-M2 in 25 problems, worse in 14 problems and they had the same performance in 1 problem.... ..."

### Table 4: Comparison among M1, M2, M3 and M4.

1999

"... In PAGE 7: ...4) using the optimization option -O4. In Table4 we find a summary of the comparison between the alternatives M1, M2, M3 and M4 of Perry, Polak-Ribi`ere and Fletcher-Reeves. For example, the first entrance of this table should be read as follows: when comparing the performance of Perry-M1 and Perry-M2, Perry-M1 was better than Perry-M2 in 25 problems, worse in 14 problems and they had the same performance in 1 problem.... ..."

### Table 2: Comparison of GRS and Atallah and Prabhakar apos;s scheme [5] on maximum deviation from the optimum. M: number of disks. Grid size = 2M 2M. We also prove analytically that whenever M (number of disks) is a Fibonacci number, our scheme has almost optimal performance (both average case and worst case). Our extensive simulation shows that the performance of our scheme varies smoothly with M, which is a strong evidence that our scheme has good behavior for all values of M. To the best of our knowledge these are the rst non-trivial performance guarantees for any e cient declustering scheme.

2000

Cited by 21

### Table I. Classification of aggregation schemes based on whether they use a robust topology and whether they use energy-efficient unreliable communication.

2004

Cited by 85

### Table 1: Optimized CPM schemes.

2000

"... In PAGE 11: ...Figure 2: Optimized phase pulses of di erent length for M = f4, 8, 16, 32g. The optimum modulation index is given in Table1 . The phase pulses are plotted in the non-constantinterval [0;;LT] only.... In PAGE 11: ... 6 Results and Discussion An extensive search for optimal phase pulses for CPM schemes of di erent M and L has been done. In Table1 we list, for each M and L, the maximum d 2 min found together with the optimum modulation index h opt and the gain compared to the GMSK phase pulse and modulation index found in [2], under the constraint of ful lling the power spectral density mask in Fig. 1.... In PAGE 12: ...The schemes in Table1 have been found by starting from the following initial values: GMSK phase pulse and modulation index in [2] Linear phase pulse and a modulation index from [2] Linear phase pulse and a small modulation index GMSK phase pulse and modulation index in [2] plus a Gaussian random variable with standard deviation 0:1 Linear phase pulse and a small modulation index plus a Gaussian random variable with standard deviation 0:1. Other local minima, with smaller minimum Euclidean distance, than in Table 1 exist for some of the starting guesses.... In PAGE 12: ...The schemes in Table 1 have been found by starting from the following initial values: GMSK phase pulse and modulation index in [2] Linear phase pulse and a modulation index from [2] Linear phase pulse and a small modulation index GMSK phase pulse and modulation index in [2] plus a Gaussian random variable with standard deviation 0:1 Linear phase pulse and a small modulation index plus a Gaussian random variable with standard deviation 0:1. Other local minima, with smaller minimum Euclidean distance, than in Table1 exist for some of the starting guesses. In practice, the modulation index has to be rational, so it has to be rounded o , up or down, to an appropriate rational number.... In PAGE 12: ... In practice, the modulation index has to be rational, so it has to be rounded o , up or down, to an appropriate rational number. In Table1 wehave listed the best schemes when the modulation index is treated as a free optimization parameter. But we can restrict it to be the round-o value and do another optimization starting with the optimized phase pulse.... In PAGE 16: ...Bandwidth BT b M L 99% 99:9% 99:99% 8 3 0:183 0:247 0:393 16 3 0:194 0:246 0:322 However in this work wehave been using a spectrum requirement mask, which is often the case in standards for wireless communication systems. The schemes in Table1 thus have di erent in-band power values.... In PAGE 16: ... It is interesting to see that, for a given M, d 2 min saturates when increasing L. For the longest phase pulses in Table1 the two shortest error events, [2;; ;2;; 0;;:::] and [2;; ;4;; 2;; 0;;:::], have almost equal Euclidean distance. For M = 4 the modulation index can be bigger and the symbol weight distribution becomes much more dense, because many long error sequences give about the same Euclidean distance as the two shortest ones.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1: Graph topologies. Running times (in milliseconds) on a 4 node, 32 processor NEC SX-6. Creation time for setting up the virtual topology, without and with remapping, and resulting communication times. Optimization criterion is either total communication cost (CC) or optimal load balance (LB).

Cited by 1

### Table 3. Arguments for and against the correspondences m1, m2, m3, m4, m5 and m6

2006

"... In PAGE 10: ... We assume that a set of arguments is generated by instantiating the argumentation schemes, given in table 1, with respect to the interests and preferences Pref of the agents and taking into consid- eration the justifications G, provided by the OAS. Table3 shows each argument, labeled with an identifier Id, its type V, and the attacks A that can be made on it by opposing arguments. Based upon these arguments and the attacks, we can construct the argumen- tation frameworks which bring the arguments together so that they can be evaluated.... ..."

Cited by 6

### Table 3. Arguments for and against the correspondences m1, m2, m3, m4, m5 and m6

2006

"... In PAGE 10: ... We assume that a set of arguments is generated by instantiating the argumentation schemes, given in table 1, with respect to the interests and preferences Pref of the agents and taking into consid- eration the justifications G, provided by the OAS. Table3 shows each argument, labeled with an identifier Id, its type V, and the attacks A that can be made on it by opposing arguments. Based upon these arguments and the attacks, we can construct the argumen- tation frameworks which bring the arguments together so that they can be evaluated.... ..."

Cited by 6