### Table 5.14: Worst-case precision analysis for a typical network

### Table 2. Worst-case Execution Times

"... In PAGE 8: ...Table 2. Worst-case Execution Times For the purposes of this example, suppose that using worst case analysis based on default timing behaviour for the target architecture, the execution times shown in Table2 are computed for the statements. Suppose further that the user speci es the task switching overhead to be 5 time units.... ..."

### Table 4: Retrieval percentage of ClusterTree and SR-Tree for different p value.

2003

"... In PAGE 24: ... = 1, 2, ... 100. Table4 lists the 10 and 40 dimensional retrieval percentages. When the dataset is 5- dimensional, ADS performs better MDS (shown in Figure 15-b), while MDS shows better performance when the dataset is 10-dimensional (shown in Table 4).... In PAGE 24: ... = 1, 2, ... 100. Table 4 lists the 10 and 40 dimensional retrieval percentages. When the dataset is 5- dimensional, ADS performs better MDS (shown in Figure 15-b), while MDS shows better performance when the dataset is 10-dimensional (shown in Table4 ). In both datasets, ODS has lower retrieval percentage than MDS and ADS.... In PAGE 26: ... ODS takes advantage of the data distribution, therefore, it achieves better performance than ADS and MDS. ODS almost has the same performance as OPT, as shown in Figure 15 and Table4 . As Table 4 shows, when the dataset is 40 dimensional, the SR-Tree searches half of the dataset to get the nearest neighbors.... In PAGE 26: ...s 40. That means that the variation of distance decreases when the dimensionality increases. This also leads that the ratio between dmin and davr is close to 1. Therefore, MDS, ADS, ODS and OPT have similar per- formance when dimension is 40, as shown in Table4 . With the introduction of clusters and subclusters, the retrieval percentage of the ClusterTree is 30% lower than that of the SR-Tree.... ..."

Cited by 4

### Tables 1 and 2 summarize our new results on worst-case capacity in sensor networks and compares them to the known capacity results in uniformly distributed networks [8]. The tables also show the fundamental price of worst-case node placement in wireless sensor networks.

### Table 1: The variation of the worst-case analysis with the Tmax value.

2004

Cited by 3

### Table 1: The variation of the worst-case analysis with the Tmax value.

2004

Cited by 3

### Table 2 The worst-case recurrences in the analysis of mis.

2007

### Table 3 The worst-case recurrences in the re ned analysis of mis.

2007

### Table 2: Definitions of Worst-Case Instruction Categories

1999

"... In PAGE 86: ... Among paths 1 and 2 for the second iteration, path 1 is the shorter path. Its Table2 0: Example for Best-Case Loop Analysis Iteration P 1P2P3P4P5Shor test Time 1 44 54 3 44 2 7 10 1 47... In PAGE 87: ... However, the true BCET of this loop can be slightly greater.Ifthe loop has just one iteration, the Table2 1: Information on Three Paths in Hypothetical Loop HowPath is Evaluated Path 1 Path 2 Path 3 Treat first misses as misses 19 18 13 Treat first misses as hits 10 9 13... In PAGE 89: ...Table2 2: Results After Adding Branch Constraint Analysis Worst-Case Results Obser ved + Iter.... In PAGE 96: ...Table2 3: Estimated Ratios for Levels of Analysis Worst-Case Results NaiveCache Only +Pipelining + Iter.... In PAGE 97: ...Table2 4: Response Time Measurements Static Cache Timing Timing Simulator Analyzer Analyzer Compiler Percent Percent Percent Seconds Name Des 32 5631.35 Expint 38 458.... ..."

Cited by 4

### Table 13 - Descriptive Statistics for Worst-Case and Alternative Release Scenarios

"... In PAGE 22: ... Since there are no objective criteria for developing alternative scenarios, the results vary widely, even among similar facilities. Except for including the basic parameters of the data distribution in Table13 , this study has not attempted any in-depth analysis of alternative scenario data. Table 13 indicates basic descriptive statistics for endpoint distances and populations for toxic and flammable worst-case and alternative release scenarios.... In PAGE 22: ... Except for including the basic parameters of the data distribution in Table 13, this study has not attempted any in-depth analysis of alternative scenario data. Table13 indicates basic descriptive statistics for endpoint distances and populations for toxic and flammable worst-case and alternative release scenarios. As expected, alternative release scenarios for both toxic and flammable scenarios have, in general, shorter endpoint distances and affect smaller populations than do the worst case scenarios for the same hazard class.... In PAGE 22: ... Similarly, as flammable worst case scenarios are generally less severe than toxic worst case scenarios, so are flammable alternative scenarios less severe than toxic alternative scenarios. Table13 also effectively highlights the much larger scale of toxic scenarios relative to flammable scenarios. All statistical measures for the distribution of flammable scenarios are far lower than those for the distribution of toxic scenarios.... ..."