### Table 3 demonstrates the computed optimized weights for different numbers of Fourier descriptors. Table 4 displays about the total number of optimized weights used for different numbers of Fourier descriptors and the recognition rate achieved. In

"... In PAGE 8: ... As a result, the number of descriptors used in the recognition process is only f out of F. Table3 . Optimized weights for different numbers of Fourier descriptors.... In PAGE 9: ...Table3 and 4, was considered, one can see a much better recognition results than using even 7 un- weighted FDs in Table 2. In the second experiment, the results are better than using 11 un-weighted FDs.... ..."

### Table 3.3: The Mapping from Insecure Operators to Secure Functions

### Table 3.3: The Mapping from Insecure Operators to Secure Functions

### Table 1 Comparison of nine CA action implementations.

"... In PAGE 27: ... In total, we have produced nine different implementations of CA actions (five in Ada95 and four in Java): Exp-A1 [Romanovsky, Randell et al 1997], Exp-A2, Exp-A3, Exp- A4, Exp-J1, Exp-J2, Exp-J3, Exp-J4, Exp-A5. Table1 compares these... ..."

### Table 1: Sizes of comlponents of IBP

"... In PAGE 8: ... To prove that this concern is not serious, we estimate the size of IBP. The size of each component of IBP is shown in Table1 . A packed reference list item is an item into which four reference list items are packed together to avoid wasting bits in locations of inter-partition pointers, each of which actually needs 12 bits.... ..."

### Table 2 Results of Example 1 by GA and MILP (min PT) GA MILP Orders

"... In PAGE 5: ... (2000) for minimizing the total processing time with different problem sizes. Results are shown in Table2 . It can be found that: (1) For small-size problems, MILP can get the optimal solution of the problem within a short time.... In PAGE 16: ... The parameters and the termination condition are the same as previous. Table2 summarizes the results of Example 1 produced by GA and MILP with problem size from 5 to 24 orders. The maximum number of iteration for MILP was set to be 100,000.... In PAGE 18: ... 17 Gantt chart of a schedule for Example 1 (20 orders over 25 units) by GA (min PT) Fig. 18 Gantt chart of a schedule for Example 1 (24 orders over 25 units) by GA (min PT) From Table2 , we can see that GA performs much better than MILP both in solution quality and in search time: Solution quality: For the 5-order problem, both GA and MILP obtained the optimal solution. From the 8-order problem to the 24-order problem, GA obtained better objective value than MILP.... In PAGE 19: ... Fig. 19 is drawn from the data in Table2 and shows the ith the increasing of the problem size, the difference ge-size problem, GA performs much better than MILP. To test that stability of the proposed approach, 10 com lem size in Example 1-3.... ..."