### Table 2: Distinguishing congestion losses from corruption losses.

"... In PAGE 6: ... Many algorithms have been proposed using this method. They are concluded in Table2 . Authors in [12] provide an comparison for some of the algorithms.... ..."

### Table 2. Transient loss performance measured from simu-

1998

Cited by 1

### Table 1: Persistence of M

"... In PAGE 3: ... De- noting the state of M i [t]by m i [t]wehave c[t]= hM 1 [t]=m 1 [t];;M 2 [t]=m 2 [t];;:::;;M n [t]=m n [t]i. From the independence assumption of the failure pro- cesses wehave: P(C[t 2 ]=c[t 2 ] j C[t 1 ]=c[t 1 ]) = P(M 1 [ t 2 ]=m 1 [t 2 ];;:::;;M n [t 2 ]=m n [t 2 ] j M 1 [t 1 ]=m 1 [t 1 ];;:::;;M n [t 1 ]=m n [t 1 ]) = 1 i n P(M i [t 2 ]=m i [t 2 ] j M i [t 1 ]=m i [t 1 ]) EachofP(M i [t 2 ]=m i [t 2 ] j M i [t 1 ]=m i [t 1 ]) can be computed as shown in Table1 . Thus, the failure pro- cesses of the individual components and an assump- tion about their independence gives us a model for the persistence of the system state.... In PAGE 6: ... The link between M A [t 1 ]andM A [t 2 ] represents the persistence of the state of the AND gate. We compute the distribution P(M A [t 2 ]jM A [t 1 ]) using Table1 . When using the ta- ble, weset A = 1 MTBF A = 1 100 and t 2 ; t 1 =20.... ..."

### TABLE I COMPARISON OF TCP AND NETWORK CROSS LAYER PROPOSALS TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN LOSSES DUE TO ROUTE FAILURES AND CONGESTION.

2005

Cited by 3

### Table 6: Loss Function Matrix (Non-Persistent Input Excitation) 2

"... In PAGE 12: ... Non-Persistent Input Excitation The same process is then identi ed with a constant input and white process noise v(t) with standard deviation v = 0:5. The identi ed parameter and loss function matrix are shown in Table 5 and Table6 respectively. From the loss function matrix in Table 6, it is seen that the the fourth diagonal element... In PAGE 12: ... The identi ed parameter and loss function matrix are shown in Table 5 and Table 6 respectively. From the loss function matrix in Table6 , it is seen that the the fourth diagonal element... ..."

### Table 1. The transient loss ratio measured from simulation for LRD process I and bandwidth C determined based on the upper bound on the expected loss ratio for performance parameter = 10?2 and 10?3.

"... In PAGE 5: ... For example, suppose that we use the expected tra c loss ratio as performance measure. Table1 shows the bandwidth C determined according to the upper bound and the tran- sient loss performance measured from simulation with 95% con dence intervals for LRD process I. We see that tran- sient loss performance guarantee based on the upper bound... ..."

### Table 3 lists the transients analyzed, along with the transient

"... In PAGE 7: ...042 Pressurizer Spray 2 amp;3 210A 4 quot; pipe to reducer weld 0.081 Table3 . List of Transients and Transient Groups Number Transient Description 1A Heatup, may include hydrotest (at pressure indicated) 1ACF Core Flood Check Valve Test During Heatup 1BCF Cooldown with Core Flood Decay Heat Removal Start 1B Cooldown (zero load if so indicated) 2A/2B Power Increase/Decrease 3 Power Loading 4 Power Unloading 5 Step Load Increase 6 Step Load Decrease 7 Step Load Reduction 8A Reactor Trip, Loss of Flow 8B Reactor Trip, High Temp.... ..."

### Table 2: Failure rate assumptions for independent failures We assume that the failure rate of a correlated failure that affects the message transmissions on both replicated channels, i.e., both messages of a node, is subsumed in the ECU transient failure rate. This failure rate is orders of magnitude higher than the failure rate 305

2001

"... In PAGE 9: ... It is not possible to validate the fault-tolerance mechanisms without a clearly stated fault hypothesis. In Table2 we state the failure rate assumption (order of magnitude estimate) concerning the ... In PAGE 9: ... This failure rate is orders of magnitude higher than the failure rate 305 calculated under the assumption of independent message loss TTP/C: The fault-hypothesis of TTP/C states that any properly configured TTP/C cluster will tolerate any single failure and many multiple failures of its constituent parts. If we assume the independent failure rates outlined in Table2 , then the probability that a level-2 fault occurs once during the lifetime of car is extremely low. In a properly designed application, 310 the membership service is used to detect a violation of the fault hypothesis (a level-2 fault) in the communication system and to activate the NGU strategy.... ..."

Cited by 2