### Table 3: NF ; NB: observed number of ISR events in the forward and backward hemispheres ; Acounting FB

1997

"... In PAGE 12: ...symmetry by at most 0.02 in the energy region between 40 and 88 GeV. The asymmetry was also calculated, after correcting for the selection ine ciency as described in Section 6.1, by counting the number of events with positive and negative cos , since AFB = NF ? NB NF + NB (19) with NF = Z 1 0 dN d cos d cos NB = Z 0 ?1 dN d cos d cos : (20) Table3 shows the asymmetries obtained with the two methods as a function of ps0 up to 87 GeV. The raw asymmetries obtained with the t were corrected for the contamination by FSR events in a similar way as the polar angle distributions were corrected (see Sec- tion 6.... In PAGE 12: ...1). These corrected values are also shown in Table3 , and are displayed in Figure 6 together with the SM prediction for the Improved Born asymmetry. Figure 6 also shows the asymmetries measured by DELPHI near the Z0 peak (see [12,14]), after correction to Improved Born values.... In PAGE 12: ... For the systematic error, the error on the purity of the sample was taken into account. The numbers obtained are given as a function of ps0 in Table3 and are shown in Figure 7, together with the prediction of the Standard Model. The theoretical predictions include all electroweak radiative corrections, apart from the box diagrams which are very small... ..."

### TABLE IV SAD COUNTS PER MB AND LUMINANCE PSNR VALUES USING FORWARD- BACKWARD EARLY DECISION FOR B-PICTURES Sequence

2004

Cited by 2

### Table 10: Numbers of selected events, forward and backward tags, tagging e ciency di erences and measured values of Rb. The values labelled Rmeas b

### Table 3: Dimuons forward-backward asymmetries measured in Monte-Carlo dimuons for generated and selected events having qs0=s gt; 0.9, with the statistical error. The results are estimated using two methods : (1) a counting method and (2) a t method with likelihood maximisation

### Table 2: Results of the forward-backward pruning method.

1999

"... In PAGE 3: ...he word graph was 4.44 % at a WGD of 105.08. Then we used for- ward pruning on the one hand and forward-backward pruning on the other hand to reduce the size of the word graph with different values for fLat and fLat fb. The results are shown in Table 1 for the forward pruning and Table2 for the forward-backward prun- ing (FLat and FLat fb denote the logarithm of fLat and fLat fb). Comparing the results of the two pruning methods we see, that forward-backward pruning leads to smaller word graphs.... ..."

Cited by 10

### Table 2. Results: Viterbi vs. Forward-Backward

2002

Cited by 5

### Table 4 Results of two-step classification. The code for the used feature selection method is made of the used criterion (Nearest Neighbor or Mahalanobis) and the used feature selection method (Forward, Backward).

### Table 3: The number of forward and backward events left after both parts of selection and the AFB calculated from these values and from t method, with error, for data from 92-95.

"... In PAGE 11: ... Figure 10 shows AFB(ps0) for 92{95 data after all corrections. Table3 shows AFB(ps0) before and after all the corrections made (i.e.... ..."

### Table 1-1. Normal GP v. Backward chaining on Quartic, Poly 4 and Poly 10. Population 10000. Generations 30. Means of 1000 runs. Forward Backward

"... In PAGE 15: ... So far we have compared forward GP and BC-GP when both algorithms are given the same number of tness evaluations. In Table1 -1, we show a comparison when they are run for the same number of generations (G = 30). Thanks to the savings obtained by avoiding to create and evaluate individuals not sampled by selection (and any of their unnecessary ancestors), by the end of the runs, BC-GP evolved solutions of similar tness but took around 20% fewer tness evaluations.... ..."