### Table 1: Summary of limits.

"... In PAGE 5: ... The summary of these derivations is given here. Given k the spatial frequency of a grating, T the system sampling period, v the scanning velocity, the device resolution, b the force resolution, a temporal safety factor (at least 2, bet- ter 10), a spatial safety factor (at least 2, better 10), a force reconstruction safety factor (at least 10), A the desired force amplitude the rendered grating, A0 the maxi- mum control sti ness, and F0 the rst mode of the device, then Table1 summarizes the limits that cannot be exceeded in order to make it possible to render a given grating with a given device. These limits do not guarantee that the grat- ing question will be rendered correctly, but if one of these limits is exceeded it is highly likely that it will not be the case.... ..."

### Table 2. Proof System

2004

"... In PAGE 8: ... We now see that it also forms the basis of a sound and complete proof theory, and a decision procedure based on proof-search. The rules of the proof system are shown in Table2 . Since there is no Cut rule, the rules have a rather odd form.... ..."

Cited by 34

### Table 2. Proof System

2004

"... In PAGE 8: ... We now see that it also forms the basis of a sound and complete proof theory, and a decision procedure based on proof-search. The rules of the proof system are shown in Table2 . Since there is no Cut rule, the rules have a rather odd form.... ..."

Cited by 34

### Table 2. Proof System

2004

"... In PAGE 8: ... We now see that it also forms the basis of a sound and complete proof theory, and a decision procedure based on proof-search. The rules of the proof system are shown in Table2 . Since there is no Cut rule, the rules have a rather odd form.... ..."

Cited by 34

### Table 2. Proof System

2004

Cited by 34

### Table 2. Proof System

2004

Cited by 34

### Table 2. Proof System

2004

Cited by 34

### Table 9: The proof system

"... In PAGE 23: ... The proof system is defined in Table 10. Rules R1-R5 are essentially the same as in Table9 , where we have the rules for the finitary logics. The only difference is the hypothesis H.... ..."

### Table 1. Lines of Isar proof code for different parts of the proof

2006

"... In PAGE 12: ... In total, the proof of the correctness of the transformation from automata to a PLC language contains approximately 1500 lines of proof code. Table1 shows the distribution of lines of proof code for the different parts of the proof. 5 Here, the Isabelle/HOL operator llparenthesis.... ..."

Cited by 1