Description of the Deliverable Sample Clauses

Description of the Deliverable. The task 5.3 aims at investigating and implementing a software module which permits deployment of a distributed application on the most suitable hardware resource. In our vision, a distributed application is a set of software modules which communicate each other through the network (mostly by means of REST API), which is also the general setting of a microservices. Since OpenStack has been chosen as cloud computing manager, one of the aim of this document is describing the modules designed to handle this functionality, such as controlling compute, scheduling resources, deploying instances, migrating workloads and monitoring status of the infrastructure. The practical goal of this task is to extend native functionalities of OpenStack with extra capabilities, tailoring the current modules to OPERA objectives. Specifically, the activities regard integrating, customizing or replacing native software with new code in order to place instances on the most suitable architecture, taking into account consumption profiles of resources. A prototype of a heterogeneous architecture scheduler for OpenStack with focus on energy efficiency will be implemented. ISMB is the task leader since it owns competences on cloud platform (OpenStack), TECH and IBM participate in the development of specific modules and functions for the interaction with operating system/hypervisor level. CSI provides support for real cloud computing application requirements. The final version of the software D5.3 – Cloud software interface, will be delivered on M34 after the refinement cycles defined in the project.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Description of the Deliverable. Nanoscale 3D imaging of active layers and interfaces in the most promising device architectures: This study will allow the investigation of complex multi-layered systems in which hard and soft materials (polymers) are combined in OPV devices. 3D organization of the photoactive layer and the various interfaces in the device structure, that depend on the materials combination and the chosen processing route, will be investigated and described. Such information will be linked to complementary analytical data (D2.5) to correlate morphological, optical, and electrical properties of the devices.
Sample 1
Description of the Deliverable. T2.1:Model based on Poisson occurrences applied to the official seismotectonic zonation ZS9. This activity is intended to create a module that mimics the ER used in the official SH map for Italy. This will help to compare the effectiveness of the other time-dependent modules. The main object of Task 2 is the release of several earthquake occurrence models according to the different proposed approaches, so that they go to implement the dynamic model of seismic hazard of Italy. The above quotation from the project contains the description of this deliverable: one of these models has to be consistent with the official seismic hazard map of Italy. When one says the “official seismic hazard map of Italy”, this is a clear reference to the MPS04 map released in 2004 by the Mps Working Group (2004) and published in the “ad hoc” website xxxx://xxxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xxxx.xx: this map became an official document of Italy after the Ordinance 3519/2006 by the Prime Minister, published in the Official Gazette in April 28th 2006 (figure 1). Figure 1 – Official seismic hazard map of Italy (sensu OPCM 3519/2006): expected PGA with 10% of probability of exceedance in 50 years. The MPS04 represents the median value of 16 branches of the adopted logic-tree approach, where all the reliable alternatives were explored with regard to the time-interval completeness of the earthquake catalogue, the estimation of seismic rates and the ground-motion predictive relationship, within a standard Cornell’s approach to PSHA. As requested by the Task coordinator, the aim of this deliverable was to provide a non- parametric earthquake recurrence model: for each cell of a standard prefixed grid covering whole Italy the probability of having exactly 1 event for every magnitude bin considered is expressed. The adopted procedure can be summarized as follows: • in the original work for MPS04, the seismicity rates were expressed as number of earthquakes per 100 years in 12 magnitude bins, ranging from Mw 4.76 to 7.29; • the seismicity rates were evaluated for each seismic source zone of the ZS9 model (Xxxxxxx et al., 2008); • the Italian territory was subdivided in about 9000 cells (0.1° x 0.1° in latitude and longitude); • for each one of the original 12 magnitude bins the seismicity rates were splitted up among the cells inside each seismic source zone; • the seismicity rates for each cell were normalized to the cell area; • the rate of expected events in every cell and every magnitude bin was then co...
Sample 1
Description of the Deliverable. The QAP will be set up and maintained to monitor all deliverables before finalising them. The deliverable also contains a risk analysis and contingency planning related to Quality Assurance and deliverables.
Sample 1
Description of the Deliverable. Deliverable 6.3 compiles the main teaching and learning courses and resources identified by EUN, including a detailed description of the approach used to select the materials and the modalities of promotion of the materials. Although it offers a systematic collection of resources and courses (Annex 1), the deliverable does not constitute a complete list of all teaching materials and learning opportunities currently available in Europe, nor of all the resources identified by EUN, as this would not result on a readable document. The catalogue is instead meant to collect the most commonly shared/used resources and courses with proven high quality and to identify reliable databases where equivalent materials can be found. These databases, and their connection to the Grand Coalition for Digital Jobs and more specifically to the DIGITALJOBS project activities, are also described in this document. In order to acknowledge the work of the Grand Coalition pledgers in the teaching and learning strand, the catalogue points out to some of the successful programmes and opportunities which have been implemented as a result of their activities within the Grand Coalition for Digital Jobs.
Sample 1
Description of the Deliverable. This report was compiled as part of the activities of DIGITALJOBS Work Package 6: Attracting people to ICT: innovative learning and teaching, led by XXX. The main objective of WP6 was to boost the supply side for ICT jobs creation through more aligned educational schemes as well as structural changes inside educational systems. To achieve this goal, XXX has implemented the following actions: • Organised regional and European roundtables linking education, training, industry and civil society representatives to identify and exchange best practice in teaching and learning about ICT in primary and secondary schools. • Deployed teacher training, both online and face-to-face in order to encourage educators to take up innovative and best practices in teaching ICT and computer science, and to give young people a more comprehensive view of technology studies and careers. • Identified relevant education materials and programmes, made available by the pledges of the Grand Coalition, and shared them with key education stakeholders. This report builds its conclusions on these activities and on researches and consultations actions undertaken within the DIGITALJOBS project as well as other relevant programmes, which provided with broad understanding of the many approaches and initiatives, both at formal and non forma education, to teaching computer science in innovative ways across Europe. In particular, since May 2014, three dedicated regional workshops have been organised, two questionnaire on computing in the curriculum have been distributed to Ministries of Education, ad hoc desk research has been carried out, high level policy consultations involving education policy makers and ICT sector major companies representatives have been integrated in major events, and finally a European closing workshop took place in Brussels on the 27th of January 2016. Informed by the results of these consultations, special attention was dedicated by XXX to the integration of computing and coding into the formal curriculum as this has proven to be a practice with high potential to change the way the discipline is taught, moving from the use of ICT tools to the understanding of their functioning and their manipulation. The ultimate aim of this report is not only to take stock of the situation of computer science education in the different countries, but also to consider and assess different approaches adopted by Ministries of Education and other stakeholders in order to xxxxxx teaching a...
Sample 1
Description of the Deliverable 
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Description of the Deliverable

  • Acceptance of Deliverables The State’s Project Manager shall be responsible for the sign-off acceptance of all Deliverables required and performed/submitted pursuant to this Agreement. Upon successful completion of a Deliverable, Contractor shall provide the State’s Project Manager with a completed Acceptance and Signoff Form (Exhibit E). The State’s Project Manager will apply the standards established in Exhibit D and the acceptance criteria set forth in subparagraph B of this article, as appropriate, to determine the acceptability of the Deliverable provided by Contractor. If the State’s Project Manager rejects the Deliverable, the parties agree to any dispute(s) resulting from such rejection(s) will be resolved as set forth in this article. Acceptance Criteria for Deliverables (“Criteria”) provided by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement include: Timeliness: The Work was provided on time; according to schedule; Completeness: The Deliverable contained all of the, Data, Materials, and features required by the Agreement; and Technical accuracy: The Deliverable complied with the standards of this Agreement, or, if this Agreement lacks a standard for provision of the Work, the currently generally accepted industry standard. Contractor shall provide the Deliverable to the State, in accordance with direction from the Project Manager and as provided for in Exhibit D. The State shall accept the Deliverable, provided that Contractor has delivered the Deliverable in accordance with the Criteria. The State’s Project Manager shall assign the Acceptance and Signoff Form to notify Contractor of the Deliverable’s acceptability. If the State rejects the Deliverable provided, the State’s Project Manager shall submit to Contractor’s Project Manager a written rejection describing in detail the failure of the Deliverable as measured against the Criteria. If the State rejects the Deliverable, then Contractor shall have a period of ten (10) Business Days from receipt of the Notice of rejection to correct the stated failure(s) to conform to the Criteria.

  • Description of the service 13.1.1 The SMS banking is a remote banking service allowing a client to: obtain information about his/her operations performed on clients bank account; request and obtain the necessary banking information, or carry out banking operations without presence in the bank, using the mobile phone number specified in the application submitted to the Bank, based on confirmation via SMS code sent to the mobile phone number specified in the application in accordance with the limits and rules defined by the Bank. Likewise, confirm the change in his/her personal data stored in the Bank’s database.

  • Rejection of Deliverables The Department reserves the right to reject deliverables, as outlined in the Grant Work Plan, as incomplete, inadequate, or unacceptable due, in whole or in part, to Xxxxxxx’s lack of satisfactory performance under the terms of this Agreement. The Grantee’s efforts to correct the rejected deliverables will be at Xxxxxxx’s sole expense. Failure to fulfill the applicable technical requirements or complete all tasks or activities in accordance with the Grant Work Plan will result in rejection of the deliverable and the associated invoice. Payment for the rejected deliverable will not be issued unless the rejected deliverable is made acceptable to Department in accordance with the Agreement requirements. The Department, at its option, may allow additional time within which Grantee may remedy the objections noted by Department. The Grantee’s failure to make adequate or acceptable deliverables after a reasonable opportunity to do so shall constitute an event of default.

  • SERVICE DELIVERABLES You will receive service on the Covered Product as described below: Carry-In: Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Covered Product must be shipped or delivered and retrieved by You at Our authorized service center during normal business hours. In-Home/On-Site: Service will be performed in Your home or on-site as indicated on the Declarations Page of this Agreement, or on Your sales receipt or invoice provided You have fulfilled the following requirements: (1) provide Our authorized technician with accessibility to the Covered Product; (2) provide a non-threatening and safe environment for Our authorized technician; and (3) an adult over the age of 18 must be present for the period of time Our authorized technician is scheduled to provide service and while Our authorized technician is on Your property servicing the Covered Product. In-Home Service will be provided by Our authorized service provider during regular business hours, local time, Monday through Friday, except holidays. Our authorized service center may opt to remove the Covered Product to perform service in-shop. The Covered Product will be returned upon completion. Additional time and mileage charges for in-home repairs outside of twenty-five (25) contiguous land miles or the normal service radius of Our authorized service center are not covered by this Agreement, and are Your responsibility.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.