### Table 1. Summary of Choreography Models

"... In PAGE 6: ... Most process algebra based choreography models adopt this approach. Table1 summarizes some selected choreography modeling languages in the three categories. Rows in the table indicate specific elements in the global or local speci- fications.... In PAGE 9: ...odels discussed in Subsections 3.2 and 3.3. All these approaches use the synchronous messaging model for communication. In [11], process algebras, called the Bologna model in Table1 , for choreographies and service implementations (the latter are often called orchestration in process algebra based languages) were developed. The Bolonga model does not include recursion in choreography and service implementation specifications.... In PAGE 9: ... In their model, a trace based semantics is used instead of bisimulation. Table1 shows the basic elements available in these process algebra based languages. 4 Design and Analysis Problems In this section, we define several key research problems concerning reasoning, design, analysis, and verification of choreographies and service implementations.... ..."

### Table 4: Implementation of consistency models.

1991

"... In PAGE 4: ... 4.2 Implementation Oriented View Table4 summarizes the implementation restrictions imposed by each of the models given processors with blocking reads (these are sufficient, but not necessary, restrictions for satisfying each model). A BASE model has been added to the four consistency models discussed earlier.... ..."

Cited by 143

### Table 4: Implementation of consistency models.

"... In PAGE 4: ... 4.2 Implementation Oriented View Table4 summarizes the implementation restrictions imposed by each of the models given processors with blocking reads (these are sufficient, but not necessary, restrictions for satisfying each model). A BASE model has been added to the four consistency models discussed earlier.... ..."

### Table 1: Consistency checking for theorem provers and model builders

1999

"... In PAGE 10: ... Model building o ers a partial solution to this problem: as well as calling the theorem prover with input : , simultaneously call the model builder with input . In practice, this should successfully deal with many of the formulas the theorem prover can apos;t handle, as is shown in Table1 . Here the top row lists possible responses from the theorem prover to : , while the left hand column lists possible responses of the model builder to .... ..."

Cited by 16

### Table 7. Examples of Items to Review for Consistency Checks Between Types of Information

2002

"... In PAGE 62: ... In order to review consistency between fields, the data validator should be knowledgeable about field activities in order to identify appropriate fields to review. Table7 gives examples to consider when reviewing the field records. Step 2.... ..."

### Table 3: Model checking.

2000

"... In PAGE 6: ... We have also implemented preimage computation using the hy- brid method. Table3 shows that the hybrid method in model check- ing also outperforms the conjunction method in time and space. These are preliminary results obtained on a limited number of cases.... ..."

Cited by 23

### Table 3: Model checking.

"... In PAGE 6: ... We have also implemented preimage computation using the hy- brid method. Table3 shows that the hybrid method in model check- ing also outperforms the conjunction method in time and space. These are preliminary results obtained on a limited number of cases.... ..."

### Table 3: Model checking.

"... In PAGE 6: ... We have also implemented preimage computation using the hy- brid method. Table3 shows that the hybrid method in model check- ing also outperforms the conjunction method in time and space. These are preliminary results obtained on a limited number of cases.... ..."

### Table 1. Messages responce times by Model Checking approach

2004

"... In PAGE 4: ...ime properties (e.g. end-to-end response, state reachabil- ity). Table1 shows the verified message response times (from queuing till delivering). Notice that the schedul- ing theory based analysis methods [10, 7] do not con- sider the logical aspect of the system behavior (in our ap- proach modeled by timed automata Rope-Drum in Fig- ure 5 and PIDTask in Figure 4).... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1. Checks on Parasolid Model

"... In PAGE 28: ... Many explicit checks are made of the validity of this model. The names of the functions which make such checks with the error messages they print and an explanation (if needed) are listed in Table1 . The functions are in alphabetical order.... ..."