CSP. V6.0 First-in-human clinical study with RNA-Immunotherapy combination of IVAC_W_bre1_uID and IVAC_M_uID for Individualized Tumor Therapy in Triple Negative Breast Cancer Patients
CSP. The language of CSP was first described by Hoare [Hoa85]. It is a pro- cess algebra that can be used to describe systems composed by interacting components, which are independent self-contained entities (called processes) with particular interfaces that are used to interact with the environment. In [Ros98], a new version of CSP was presented: it differs from Hoare’s ver- sion only on the treatment of alphabets. It is the later version that forms the basis of FDR, a tool that model-checks a machine-processable subset of CSP, called CSPM, which is a combination of an ASCII version of CSP with an expression language inspired on functional languages. A link between the CSP and CSPM syntaxes can be found in [Ros98]. In what follows, we briefly describe the most important CSP constructs. → | | The two most basic CSP processes are STOP and SKIP ; the former dead- locks, and the latter does nothing and terminates. If P is a CSP process, and a an event, then the prefixing a P is initially able to perform only a, and after performing a it behaves as P . A boolean guard may be associated with a process: given a predicate g , if the condition g is true, the process g & P behaves like P ; it deadlocks otherwise. Processes P 1 and P 2 can be combined in sequence using the sequence operator: P 1; P 2. This process executes the process P 2 after the execution of P 1 terminates. The external choice P 1 Q P 2 initially offers events of both processes. The performance of the first event resolves the choice in favour of the process that performs it. Differently from the external choice, the environment has no control over the internal choice P 1 P 2, in which the process internally (nondetermin- istically) resolves the choice. The sharing parallel composition P 1 [ cs ] P 2 synchronises P 1 and P 2 on the channels in the set cs; events that are not \ | | | listed occur independently. Differently, in the alphabetised parallel composi- tion P 1 [cs1 cs2] P 2, the processes P 1 and P 2 synchronise on the channels that are in the intersection between cs1 and cs2; events that are not in this intersection occur independently. Processes can also be composed in inter- leaving: in P 1 P 2, both processes run independently. The event hiding operator P cs is used to encapsulate the events that are in the channel set cs. This removes these events from the interface of P , which become no longer visible to the environment. CSP also provides finite iterated operators that can be used to ...
CSP. Communicating Sequential Processes (CSP) [Hoa85, Xxx00, Xxx00x], a for- mal specification language introduced by Hoare [Hoa85] that is part of a class of languages that are known as process algebras, aims at describing communicating processes and interaction-driven computations. CSP’s domain of discourse consists of processes, which are self-contained components with particular interfaces through which they interact with their environment. The interface of a process is described as a set of events, which describe atomic, indivisible and instantaneous actions. A process is, therefore, characterised by the events it can engage in and their ordering. CSP is supported by an underlying theory to enable reasoning and model analysis about interaction and communication in this event-based model of interaction. In CSP, events are transmitted along communication channels, which carry messages of particular types. A channel has a set of associated events, cor- responding to all messages that may be carried through the channel. Process expressions are built out of events using a number of operators: Event prefixing, expressed in CSP as e P , describes a process that expects event e and then behaves as process P . Interleaving, described in CSP as P1 P2, defines a composition of two processes that execute in parallel without any synchronisation. The iterated version of interleaving, applies interleaving to any number of indexed processes: ||| i : N • P (i). • Parallel, P1 P2, describes the composition of two processes that exe- cute in parallel synchronising on the set A of events. • Sequential, P1; P 2, describes a process that executes P1 until it termi- nates, and then executes P2. • Hiding, P \ N , makes a set N of events internal to a process P . • Interrupt, P1 Δ P2, defines a composition that behaves like P1, but can be interrupted by a synchronisation on one of the initial events of P2, which then takes over. Throw, P1 Θ P 2, a relatively recent CSP operator [Ros10a], defines a form of interrupt where any occurrence of an event e ∈ A within P1 hands control to P2. Every CSP process P has an alphabet αP . Its semantics is given using four models: traces, failures, divergences and infinite traces. These are under- stood as observations of possible executions of the process P, in terms of the events from αP that it can engage in, refuse, or lead to divergence. 3 FMI Formally: state of the art We present a survey of the FMI-related literature to better understand ...
CSP. If a single suprathreshold pulse is applied during voluntary tonically activated muscle contraction it produces an MEP followed by a temporary cessation of EMG activity, known as the cortical silent period (CSP). It is typically defined as the time from the end of the MEP to the return of voluntary EMG. Several observations have indicated that the silent period is a separate phenomenon from the MEP. For example, it can be evoked at lower stimulus intensities than the MEP (Xxxxxx et al., 1992)Furthermore, changes in the background contraction and stimulus intensity have different effects on the silent period and MEP (Inghilleri et al. 1993). There are thought to be two components to the silent period, the first spinal in origin, the second cortical. For example, there is evidence that spinal excitability is decreased during the early part of the silent period with reduced H-reflex amplitudes, (Xxxx et al., 1991). It is thought that the later part is generated exclusively by long lasting inhibition originating within the motor cortex, for example, the duration of CSP is consistent with the duration of the (IPSP) elicited by GABAb receptor activation in pyramidal cells (Xxx et al., 2009). This is supported by the lengthening of the CSP by medications which increase the availability of GABAb in the synaptic cleft, tiagabine, (Xxxxxxx et al., 1999) and vigabatrin (Xxxxxxxxxxx et al., 2004). It is difficult to fully accept this as conclusive evidence that GABAb is involved however as these medications also facilitate GABAa availability, (Xxxxxxx et al., 1996).
CSP. The CSP has been utilised as an index of cortical inhibition in focal epilepsy with heterogeneous results. In patients on AEDs with focal motor seizures, CSP length was found to be shorter in the ipsilateral hemisphere in comparison to controls, (Xxxxxxxx et al., 1998). In support, (Xxxxx et al., 2005) observed shortened CSP in the ipsilateral hemisphere in medicated patients with focal epilepsies, which was more pronounced in extratemporal epilepsies. In contrast, CSP length was found to be increased in the ipsilateral hemisphere of patients with focal epilepsy on AEDs, (Xxxxxxxxx et al., 2000). Furthermore they reported an inter-hemispheric asymmetry in the CSP length as a function of stimulus intensity, suggesting that there may be a dysfunction of cortical excitability which is dependent on stimulus intensity. As with motor threshold it seems that there is a lack of convergence within the focal epilepsy CSP literature, most probably as a result of heterogeneous patient groups and methodological inconsistencies in measuring the length of the silent period.
CSP. Some studies have reported increased CSP in untreated patients with IGE, (Xxxxxxxxx et al., 2001), this was interpreted as increased intracortical inhibition to protect against seizure occurrence. In agreement with this, (Xxxxx et al., 2009) found increased CSP in 21 patients and, of further interest, in their asymptomatic relatives. Results from other studies have reported no differences between controls and patients however, in both untreated (Delvaux 2001),(Xxxxxx et al., 2009) and medicated patients (Xxxxxxxxxx et al., 2000).
CSP accepts CSM’s agreement mentioned in Clause 2.2 above to perform all liabilities and obligations of Terra in the place of Terra; and
CSP. New Xxxxxx CSP Awards
(a) Worldpay employees who were granted CSP Awards as part of their recruitment package, and who continue to hold such CSP Awards as at the Effective Date will receive an award in respect of Vantiv Stock in exchange for their CSP Awards (each a “New Xxxxxx Rollover CSP Award”) on the following terms. The number of Worldpay Shares that are exchanged will include a number in respect of any dividend equivalents, to the extent provided for under the terms of the relevant CSP Award:
(i) the number of Vantiv Stock subject to each New Xxxxxx Rollover CSP Award will be calculated by using the following formula: (B x £C) / £D = E, where: ‘B’ is the number of Worldpay Shares subject to the original CSP Award (including any accrued dividend equivalents thereon); ‘£C’ is the aggregate value of (i) the cash and (ii) the closing price of the Vantiv Stock payable to Worldpay Shareholders per Worldpay Share on the Effective Date (which price will be converted into pounds sterling using the exchange rate on Bloomberg at 6.00pm (GMT) on the Effective Date); ‘£D’ is the closing price of a Vantiv Stock on the Effective Date (which price will be converted into pounds sterling using the exchange rate on Bloomberg at 6.00pm (GMT) on the Effective Date); and ‘E’ is the number of Vantiv Stock subject to the New Xxxxxx Rollover CSP Award, rounded down to the nearest whole share.
(ii) All other material terms and conditions of the original CSP Awards to which the New Xxxxxx Rollover CSP Awards relate (including the right to dividend equivalents, should dividends become payable) will continue to apply including (but not limited to) the original vesting periods, SAVE THAT if the holder of a New Xxxxxx Rollover CSP Award ceases to be an employee before the original vesting date for any reason other than as a Bad Leaver, the New Xxxxxx Rollover CSP Award will not lapse, but continue to vest in accordance with its terms on its original vesting date subject to pro-rating for time which will apply in respect of the period of time that has elapsed since the original date of grant and the date of termination as compared to the original vesting period. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Vantiv reserves the right, in its absolute discretion, to permit vesting in full (as it sees fit on a case by case basis). Any New Xxxxxx Rollover CSP Award held by a Bad Leaver will lapse and cease to be exercisable in its entirety. General CSP Awards
(b) All other holders of CSP Awards who ...
CSP bands and appurtenances shall be uniformly coated inside and outside with a 0.05 inch minimum thickness bituminous coating in accordance with AASHTO M 190.
CSP. Nothing herein shall restrict FDC or its Affiliates from hosting a site providing or offering Pay Anyone and/or Bill Xxxsentment and Payment Services of a third party via distribution or transmission of computer software and/or informational content of such third party, where such hosting activities are generally conducted for other parties and the fee or consideration arrangements therefore are arms' length transactions of the type generally made; provided, however, that if the site is hosted by and for FDC or any of its Affiliates, FDC and its Affiliates will be required to comply with the other provisions of this Agreement; provided, further, that FDC or its Affiliates will not host a site for a third Person offering an FDC branded Pay Anyone or Bill Presentment and Payment product or service which would otherwise violate the terms of this Agreement. As used herein, "hosting" means the transmission or publication of another's products or services, which may be accomplished through use of the hosting party's equipment and facilities, where the hosting party does not create or control the hosted products or services, but rather is acting as a transmitter or publisher of such products or services.
