### Table 1. Comparative analysis between semantic and non-semantic policy languages

### Table 1 Primitive constructs in the Signal language Name Syntax Interpretation Semantics

"... In PAGE 6: ...3 Signal Semantics We are now ready to express the semantics of the Signal language and its tagged model as a transition system. A Signal process is the conjunction of a set of basic Signal statements, listed Table1 along with their interpretation semantics. Each variable v in the Signal speci cation is represented by two variables in the transition system: (1) variable v for holding the data, ranging over the same domain as in the speci cation, and (2) variable v for the clock, ranging over a binary domain to indicate presence or absence of a value in v.... In PAGE 6: ... In a run, we denote the k-th value in the sequence by vk and the k-th clock by v k. The statements in Table1 are divided into three categories. Monochronous (\single-clocked quot;) equations require all input and output signals to be present at the same time.... In PAGE 8: ... From the root, these two nodes are on di erent branches { meaning that both clocks will never be present at the same time. Now, let us describe the Signal statements in Table1 for clock relations. The statement for clock extraction, Z:=^X, is used to specify that signal Z describes the clock of X.... In PAGE 9: ... We de ne each stuttering run s = s0; ?; ?; ?; ?; s1; ?; :::; ?; s2; ::: to be equivalent to the run = s0; s1; s2; ::: obtained from s by removing all stut- tering (?) states. We now describe how each equation of Table1 can be translated to a... In PAGE 10: ... The corresponding automaton has two states: one for ring the reaction and one where the reaction is in a stuttering state. The equations in Table1 ensure that the ring state can be entered only when all clocks are present, and that the stuttering state can be entered only when all clocks are absent. These constraints express the assumption that, for arithmetic operations, the only allowable behaviors for the environment are the monochronous behaviors, with respect to signals X, Y and Z.... ..."

### Table 2. Semantic correspondences

"... In PAGE 10: ... UEML 1.0 metamodel The Table2 (output of step h) shown below provides the semantic correspon- dences between the UEML 1.0 meta-model and the three language meta-models.... ..."

### Table 5. Clustering accuracy on Australian sign language dataset; 18 semantically related pairs of signs compared. Top: 5 representative pairs are shown for a range of SC-PPK clustering accuracies. Bottom: averages for the 18 pairs over di erent number of states.

"... In PAGE 7: ... Semantically-related expressions such as write and draw or antonyms such as give and take were assumed to have similar real-world symbols and formed the basis of all experiments with this dataset. Table5 shows the average accuracy over the clustering of 18 such pairs of sequences while varying the number of HMM states used and Fig 3(b) shows an embedding of three gestures. 5.... ..."

### Table 4 Semantics of the logical language.

2003

Cited by 16

### Table 2: Language features

"... In PAGE 7: ...Language-features Table2 contains the summarized assessment of the language fea- tures compared. It turns out that all three candidates have fairly similar capabilities (where the numbers give a ranking).... ..."

### Table 1: Transition semantics

1996

"... In PAGE 21: ... It is generated by the following grammar: R ::= y(x):P P ::= 0 ( x) P P jP if b then P else P yhzi R ! R P j2J Rj ? P j2J Rj V B As for the language P, names x range over N, and y; z over V which includes the special names t and f. The operational semantics of P+ is provided by the rules in Table1 and Table 3. We now introduce the remaining components for the factorization diagram: an annotation encoding A[[ ]], a attening encoding F[[ ]], and the intermediate sublanguage A .... In PAGE 39: ...3.2, it su ces to regard the case S = P j2J Rj where, according to the rules in Table1 , there is only one subcase. case C-INP For k 2 J, we have P j2J Rj ykhzi ????? ! Pkfz=xg and there is always a weakly simulating sequence by READ and COMMIT A[[ P j2J Rj ]] = ? P j2J A[[ Rj ]] ; ; ykhzi ????? ! ? P j2J A[[ Rj ]] (k7!z) ; ??! A[[ Pk ]] k j ? P j2J A[[ Rj ]] ; k amp; A[[ Pk ]] k = A[[ Pkfz=xg ]] where the amp; holds due to Lemma 6.... In PAGE 40: ...he simpli cation discussed in Section A.3.2, it su ces to regard the case A = ? P j2J Rj V B where, by de nition of U], there are three subcases. case (initial) V = ; = B : Then, with Rj = yj(x):Pj, U][[ A ]] = P j2J yj(x):U][[ Pj ]] where, according to the rules in Table1 , there is only one subcase for generating transi tions: C-INP. For k 2 J, we have P j2J yj(x):U][[ Pj ]] ykhzi ????? ! U][[ Pk ]]fz=xg and there is always a weakly simulating sequence by READ and COMMIT A = ? P j2J Rj ; ; ykhzi ????? ! ? P j2J Rj (k7!z) ; ??! Pk k j ? P j2J Rj ; k =: A0 where U][[ A0 ]] = U][[ Pk ]]fz=xg is satis ed.... ..."

Cited by 90

### Table 3 Primary language instruction 1998 and 1999 for districts in three categories of commitment to primary language programs prior to Proposition 227

2000

Cited by 2