### Table 5: Inexact IRLS method. AT KA is a low-rank downdate of AT A.

2000

Cited by 4

### Table 1 Low-rank criteria when (I + G)s = t is solved in parallel.

1996

"... In PAGE 13: ... If n gt; p3, which is a reasonable assumption for most parallel architectures and practical problem sizes, only the second values in the formulas (16,18) with the min operator apply. Table1 summarizes the order estimates for parallel factorization of and solu- tion with I + G, and Table 2 presents results for the sequential case. Suppose that A is the matrix for a discretized PDE on a cubic domain divided into cubic subdomains, and QC (or QL + QR) is composed of the original o - diagonal blocks of A.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 1 Low-rank criteria (in the case of parallel solving of (I + G)s = t).

1995

"... In PAGE 8: ... Restrictions on m that are necessary to satisfy criterion (b) can be derived from the estimates of tG given earlier in this section. These results for parallel factoring of I + G and parallel (I + G)-solve are sum- marized in Table1 . Table 2 presents analogously obtained results for sequential LU- factoring and (I + G)-solve.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1: The top four features of Buddyspace, along with a representative middle and low-ranking featur

2004

"... In PAGE 4: ...Table1... ..."

### Table 6: Number of CG iterations varying the dimension of the low-rank update.

"... In PAGE 9: ...pdate presented in Proposition 5. As a preconditioner we use IC(t) [17]. We observe a similar improvement for SPD linear systems to what was seen in the previous section. This is illustrated in Table6 where we show the number of CG iterations as we vary the dimension of the positive semi-definite update. To show that the improvement of the update is not too closely related to the quality of the initial preconditioner we show, for BCSSTK27 and S1RMQ4M1, the number of iterations for two different thresholds for IC.... ..."

### Table 1 Low-rank criteria #28in the caseofparallel solving of #28I + G#29s = t#29.

1996

"... In PAGE 32: ...Table 1 Low-rank criteria #28in the caseofparallel solving of #28I + G#29s = t#29. These results for parallel factoring of I+G and parallel #28I+G#29-solve are summarized in Table1 . Table 2 presents analogously obtained results for sequential LU-factoring and #28I + G#29-solve.... ..."

Cited by 5

### Table 39. The efficiency of the transcription system in the first, low rank, test sample.

"... In PAGE 54: ...roduced transcriptions with an error rate of only 1.7%. This is not surprising since 80% of the transcriptions generated by Twol were obtained from the internal lexicon. If the lexical lookup transcriptions are separated from the generated ones the error rates shown in Table39 are obtained. Table 39.... ..."

### Table 4: Number of GMRES(5) iterations varying the threshold for a low-rank update of dimension 5 for the matrix ORSIRR1.

2002

"... In PAGE 7: ... Once this eigencomponent is removed by the rank-one update preconditioner both GMRES(40) and BiCGStab converge. To illustrate that the proposed updates should be used to improve an already e ective precon- ditioner, we report in Table4 the number of iterations when the threshold of ILU(t) is relaxed making the original preconditioner less and less e cient. We see that, in that case, the update will only improve the convergence up to a certain level above which it does not have any e ect.... ..."

Cited by 10