### Table 3: Example 2. Events and their time bounds.

1999

"... In PAGE 14: ... 2 The TDES describing the neutralization process is depicted in Fig. 7 (as- suming l = 2, u = 3, l0 = 1 and u0 = 2 for the time bounds of the Lij as given in Table3 ). It consists of three subautomata each describing the behaviour of the system in the N or F1 or F2 condition.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1. Time bounds.

"... In PAGE 1: ... The deterministic solution is essentially a derandomization of the randomized solution. Table1 lists the time bounds for the mth operation in a sequence of operations. The incremental space cost is given in Table 2.... ..."

### Table 3. Results for checking P2 using symC for different time bounds.

2004

"... In PAGE 23: ... Thus, the comparison with the SystemC approach does not completely match. As we see in Table3 , we can also check the property with symC, however we get complete coverage within this range. For model M3, symC even beats the combined SystemC and RAVEN approach.... ..."

Cited by 3

### Table 1: Summary of Time Bounds

### Table 2: Experimental results: execution times to the frequencies. We experimented with frequency thresholds min fr between 50 and 500, and with time bounds between 15 s and 2 min. (In three cases we used two time bounds, i.e., U = fV; Wg, and in one case we searched simultaneously for all combinations of four time bounds in U.) Episode rules discovered with these parameters should reveal the paths through which people navigate when they know where they want to go.

1996

"... In PAGE 5: ... Note that the method is robust in the sense that a change in one parameter extends or shrinks the collection of frequent episodes but does not replace any. Table2 shows the execution times for the experi- ments on a PC (90 MHz Pentium, 32 MB memory, Linux operating system). The data resided in a 3.... ..."

Cited by 95

### Table 1. Upper and lower bounds for problems investigated in this pa- per. C denotes a circuit, D a DG-circuit, x an input and t a time bound.

1996

"... In PAGE 11: ... Therefore we expect that asynchronous computer systems will compute faster than synchronous systems in general. Table1 gives an overview of the upper and lower bounds concerning time,... ..."

Cited by 4

### Table 1: Results of symbolic evaluation of time-bound functions (exact counts).

2002

"... In PAGE 10: ... The example programs shown here are: ack: Ackermann function programmed using the standard rst- order recursive de nition; ack-curried: a curried version of Ackermann function that uses higher-order functions (and is almost twice as fast as the standard rst-order function); tak-cps: the Takeuchi function in CPS, part of the Gabriel benchmark suite [14]; reverse: standard rst-order list reverse function; rev-cps: a CPS version of reverse; split: taking a predicate and a list and returning two lists, one whose elements satisfy the predicate and another whose elements do not satisfy the predicate; x: factorial function programmed using the Y combinator for a heavy use of higher-order functions; map: standard map function; union: taking two sets and returning the union; index: taking an item and a list and returning the index of the item in the list, or ?1 if the item is not in the list. Table1 gives the results of symbolic evaluation of the time-bound functions for these example programs on inputs of various sizes. Several counts of the primitive operations are merged to t the table on the page.... ..."

Cited by 14