### Table 6. A comparison of numerical results for the 7-interval and 21-interval cases.

1993

"... In PAGE 26: ... We used {li } = ( 4 , 5 , 5 , 5 , 5 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 6 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 7 , 7 ) and Ai = 26 for all i. In Table6 we display the workload tail probabilities P(W(t) gt; x) for x = 1 and 10 for two time points in the last interval t = 66 and t = 70. (Here t is the time since the origin.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 7.1: The expected numerical inference results of behavioral mode Mr1 with five intervals

2007

### Table 3.1: Operations for manipulating points. For representing uncertainty, we provide the INTERVAL datatype, with numeric slots min and max, representing the real interval from min to max. An interval is created by (make INTERVAL min max) For 2D, there is a PT-INTERVAL datatype, with slots x and y, each an interval along one axis. There are also computed slots dx and dy giving the widths of the interval along the corresponding axes. All of the point operations

### Table 7. Comparison of results for R = 10000 by using the adaptive algorithm

1998

"... In PAGE 11: ... Numerical computations show that this adaptive MQ o ers much better results near the peak of the shock wave. Compared with FEM with moving nodes, this adaptive MQ is much easier to implement and, as shown in Table7 , o ers much better numerical results. 4.... ..."

Cited by 14

### Table 1 Parameter values used in numerical example. Arrival rate Holding time Initial load Revenue Cost Time interval

2002

Cited by 7

### Table 6. Comparison of results for R = 10000

1998

"... In PAGE 8: ...205 in equation (6). The result of comparison at x = 0(1/18)1 and t = 1 is shown in Table6 . Numerical comparison in this case shows that our MQ o ers better results than FEM with moving nodes and much better results than compact di erence and FEM with splitting.... ..."

Cited by 14

### Table 1 lists methods accepting ratio, interval, ordinal, nominal, and anominal variables. METHOD= GOWER|DGOWER always implies standardization. By assuming all the numeric (ordinal, interval and ratio) variables are standardized by their corresponding default methods, the range for both methods in the second column of this table is between 0 and 1, inclusively. To find out the default methods of standardization for METHOD= GOWER|DGOWER, see STD= , STDINTER= , and STDRATIO= in this session. Table 1. Methods accepting all types of variables:

### Table 3.1 The epoch sequence determined by Dssrt for the limit cycle oscillation, with period T = 50ms. Time intervals are measured relative to the onset of an inhibitory pulse at t = 200 ms. The size of the numerical integration step and the re-sampling done by Dssrt caused the final interval to stop short of precisely t = T.

### Table 4.1: E ect of Intervals On Bounding Variable Parameters The following numerical example illustrates the interval-dependent property of this tra c model. Consider a connection with Xmin = 0.1 ms, Xave = 0.3 ms, I = 133 ms, 1The unit here is packets/sec.

1993

Cited by 23