Blockchain Decision Models Sample Clauses

Blockchain Decision Models. Xx¨st and Xxxxxxx [39] proposed a model to determine if blockchain technology is appropriate for a particular problem. Several such models have been proposed, as discussed by, for example, Xxxxxxx [20]. We chose the model of Xx¨st and Xxxxxxx because it provides a detailed description of the decisions that have to be made, leaving less room for misinterpretation. Their model consist of a decision tree based on the following scenario properties:
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Blockchain Decision Models

  • SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING A. The District shall provide the training and staff development to support accountability/site- based decision-making activities. Teachers shall be given release time to attend these programs. B. Participation on the SAC shall not serve as a basis for the evaluation of any teacher. C. A minimum of three (3) to a maximum of five (5) teachers from each school shall serve on their school’s budget advisory committee formed for the purpose of making recommendations on the school’s general fund budget. Teacher members shall be elected by the faculty. Minutes from such meetings may be requested by the faculty and may be posted on the CTA bulletin board at the school by the Association Representative.

  • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC The goal of this subtask is to create an advisory committee for this Agreement. The TAC should be composed of diverse professionals. The composition will vary depending on interest, availability, and need. TAC members will serve at the CAM’s discretion. The purpose of the TAC is to: • Provide guidance in project direction. The guidance may include scope and methodologies, timing, and coordination with other projects. The guidance may be based on: o Technical area expertise; o Knowledge of market applications; or o Linkages between the agreement work and other past, present, or future projects (both public and private sectors) that TAC members are aware of in a particular area. • Review products and provide recommendations for needed product adjustments, refinements, or enhancements. • Evaluate the tangible benefits of the project to the state of California, and provide recommendations as needed to enhance the benefits. • Provide recommendations regarding information dissemination, market pathways, or commercialization strategies relevant to the project products. The TAC may be composed of qualified professionals spanning the following types of disciplines: • Researchers knowledgeable about the project subject matter; • Members of trades that will apply the results of the project (e.g., designers, engineers, architects, contractors, and trade representatives); • Public interest market transformation implementers; • Product developers relevant to the project; • U.S. Department of Energy research managers, or experts from other federal or state agencies relevant to the project; • Public interest environmental groups; • Utility representatives; • Air district staff; and • Members of relevant technical society committees. • Prepare a List of Potential TAC Members that includes the names, companies, physical and electronic addresses, and phone numbers of potential members. The list will be discussed at the Kick-off meeting, and a schedule for recruiting members and holding the first TAC meeting will be developed. • Recruit TAC members. Ensure that each individual understands member obligations and the TAC meeting schedule developed in subtask 1.11. • Prepare a List of TAC Members once all TAC members have committed to serving on the TAC. • Submit Documentation of TAC Member Commitment (such as Letters of Acceptance) from each TAC member. • List of Potential TAC Members • List of TAC Members • Documentation of TAC Member Commitment

  • Initial Decision Maker The Architect will serve as the Initial Decision Maker pursuant to Article 15 of AIA Document A201–2017, unless the parties appoint below another individual, not a party to this Agreement, to serve as the Initial Decision Maker.

  • Claim Decision Upon receipt of such claim, the Plan Administrator shall respond to such claimant within ninety (90) days after receiving the claim. If the Plan Administrator determines that special circumstances require additional time for processing the claim, the Plan Administrator can extend the response period by an additional ninety (90) days for reasonable cause by notifying the claimant in writing, prior to the end of the initial ninety (90) day period, that an additional period is required. The notice of extension must set forth the special circumstances and the date by which the Plan Administrator expects to render its decision. If the claim is denied in whole or in part, the Plan Administrator shall notify the claimant in writing of such denial. The Plan Administrator shall write the notification in a manner calculated to be understood by the claimant. The notification shall set forth: (i) The specific reasons for the denial; (ii) The specific reference to pertinent provisions of the Agreement on which the denial is based; (iii) A description of any additional information or material necessary for the claimant to perfect the claim and an explanation of why such material or information is necessary; (iv) Appropriate information as to the steps to be taken if the claimant wishes to submit the claim for review and the time limits applicable to such procedures; and (v) A statement of the claimant’s right to bring a civil action under ERISA Section 502(a) following an adverse benefit determination on review.

  • DEVELOPMENT OR ASSISTANCE IN DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS/ STATEMENTS OF WORK

  • Decision Making The Joint Development Committee and Joint Commercialization Committee shall each act by unanimous agreement of its members, with each Party having one vote. If the Joint Development Committee or Joint Commercialization Committee, after [* * *] (or such other period as the Parties may otherwise agree) of good faith efforts to reach a unanimous decision on an issue, fails to reach such a unanimous decision, then either Party may refer such issue to the Executive Officers. Such Executive Officers shall meet promptly thereafter and shall negotiate in good faith to resolve the issues. If Executive Officers cannot resolve such issue within [* * *] of referral of such issue to the Executive Officers, the resolution of such issue shall be as follows: (a) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Development Committee, determined by the Developing Party of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product at issue; provided that, notwithstanding the foregoing: (i) if Acceleron is the Developing Party and such issue relates to (x) the approval of an Additional Development Disease, or (y) matters under Section 5.6.3(d), then such issue shall be determined by [* * *]; (ii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the Joint Development Committee’s decision to go forward with a Phase 3 Clinical Trial of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product; provided that [* * *] shall continue to determine any issues that relate to the budget for and the conduct of the [* * *]; and (iii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the occurrence of any [* * *]; and (b) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Commercialization Committee, determined by Celgene. Notwithstanding the foregoing, none of Acceleron, Celgene, the Joint Development Committee or the Joint Commercialization Committee may make any decision inconsistent with the express terms of this Agreement without the prior written consent of each Party.

  • Major Decisions (A) Subject to Sections 7.3(C) and 7.3(D) with respect to the Company, all major decisions of the Company set forth below in clauses (A)(1) through (A)(6) (“Major Decisions”) shall be subject to the Company’s Articles of Incorporation and joint approval by the Advisor and Sub-advisor. For the avoidance of doubt, Major Decisions specifically exclude any decisions regarding the day-to-day operations of the Company, the decision-making authority for which has been delegated to the Sub-advisor pursuant to this Agreement. Major Decisions shall consist of the following: (1) Decisions to recommend to the Board of Directors that the Company acquire or sell Properties, Loans and other Permitted Investments; (2) Retention of investment banks for the Company; (3) Marketing methods for the Company’s sale of Shares; (4) Extending, initiating or terminating the Initial Public Offering or any subsequent Offering of the Shares; (5) Issuing press releases involving the major decisions of the Company or the Advisor or Sub-advisor or their Affiliates with respect to the business or operations of the Company; provided, that the Sub-advisor need not obtain consent to any press releases regarding acquisitions or dispositions of Properties, Loans or other Permitted Investments; and provided further, however, that notwithstanding the immediately preceding proviso, any mention of the Advisor or its Affiliates in such press releases regarding acquisitions or dispositions shall be pre-approved by the Advisor; and (6) Merging or otherwise engaging in any change of control transaction for the Company. (B) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, if the Parties do not agree to any action constituting a Major Decision that is described in any of clauses (A)(2) through (A)(6) above and that has been proposed by either Party, the Parties shall meet (in person or by phone) to discuss the issue in dispute in good faith over the five-business day period beginning with the delivery of notice of the proposed action to the other Party. (C) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, with respect to Major Decisions described in clause (A)(1) above (but subject to Section 7.3(D)), (1) joint approval shall not be required, (2) the Sub-advisor and the Advisor shall discuss the proposed transaction (either in person or by phone) prior to either Party making any recommendation of the proposed transaction to the Board of Directors, and (3) the Sub-Advisor and the Advisor shall each give due consideration to the opinions of the other Party. Ordinarily, such discussions shall begin at least five business days before a recommendation is made to the Board of Directors; however, if in the sole discretion of the Sub-advisor it is in the best interest of the Company to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors more promptly, then the Sub-advisor may do so. In the event the Parties do not agree as to whether to recommend the proposed transaction to the Board of Directors, the Sub-advisor’s decision shall govern. (D) Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 7.3 or any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, in all events, including Major Decisions, the Company will be managed under the direction of the Board of Directors. (E) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary (but subject to Section 7.3(D)), the Sub-advisor shall have sole authority to act on behalf of the Company regarding amending the Advisory Agreement.

  • Application of Funding Techniques to Programs 6.3.1 The State shall apply the following funding techniques when requesting Federal funds for the component cash flows of the programs listed in sections 4.2 and 4.3 of this Agreement. 6.3.2 Programs Below are programs listed in Section 4.2 and Section 4.3.

  • LIMITATIONS ON REVERSE ENGINEERING, DECOMPILATION AND DISASSEMBLY You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation.

  • Schematic Design Phase 1.2.1 Based on the mutually agreed upon Program of Requirements, Amount Available for the Construction Contract and the Project Schedule, the Architect/Engineer shall prepare sufficient alternative approaches utilizing BIM for design and construction of the Project to satisfy Owner’s project requirements and shall, at completion of this phase, submit Schematic Design Documents derived from the model in accordance with the BIM Execution Plan, “Facility Design Guidelines” and any additional requirements set forth in Article 15. The Architect/Engineer shall review alternative approaches to design and construction for the Project as they are being modeled at intervals appropriate to the progress of the Project with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project site or other location specified by the Owner within the State of Texas. The Architect/Engineer shall utilize the model(s) to support the review process during Schematic Design. The Architect/Engineer shall provide the Construction Manager with a compact disc containing documents and data files derived from the model to assist the Construction Manager in fulfilling its responsibilities to the Owner. 1.2.2 Architect/Engineer shall provide all services necessary to perform the services of this phase (preparation of model(s), relevant data, decision support model views and Schematic Design Documents) including, without limitation, unless otherwise approved by Owner, the preparation and prompt delivery of all items specified in the BIM Execution Plan and “Facility Design Guidelines”. 1.2.3 Architect/Engineer shall work closely with Owner in preparation of schematic drawings and shall specifically conform to Owner’s requirements regarding aesthetic design issues. 1.2.4 The Architect/Engineer shall review the Estimated Construction Cost prepared by the Construction Manager, and shall provide written comments. 1.2.5 Before proceeding into the Design Development Phase, the Architect/Engineer shall obtain Owner’s written acceptance of the Schematic Design documents and approval of the Architect/Engineer’s preliminary Estimated Construction Cost and schedule. 1.2.6 The Architect/Engineer shall participate in a final review of the Schematic Design Documents and model(s) with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project site or other location specified by Owner in the State of Texas. Prior to the Owner’s approval of the Schematic Design Documents, the Architect/Engineer shall incorporate such changes as are necessary to satisfy the Owner’s review comments, any of which may be appealed for good cause.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!