Evaluation Data. The employee shall be offered the opportunity to review, with the appropriate Xxxx/Manager, her/his evaluation data and report. The employee shall also be given the opportunity to make written comments about his/her evaluation, which shall be entered in the personnel file.
Evaluation Data. (a) Data created or maintained by a granting agency as part of the evaluation process referred to in this section are protected nonpublic data until completion of the evaluation process at which time the data are public with the exception of trade secret data as defined and classified in section 13.37.
(b) If a granting agency asks individuals outside the granting agency to assist with the evaluation of the responses, the granting agency may share not public data in the responses with those individuals. The individuals participating in the evaluation may not further disseminate the not public data they review.
Evaluation Data. 10.5.1 The employee shall be offered the opportunity to review his/her evaluation data and report with the appropriate Vice President/ delegate.
10.5.2 The employee shall be given the opportunity to make written comments about his/her evaluation which shall be entered in the personnel file.
Evaluation Data. Customer agrees that any data or information that Customer enters into the Service used on a Pilot Basis, and any customizations made to such Service by or for Customer, during the Pilot Basis period may be permanently lost unless Customer purchases the same Service on a non-Pilot Basis before the termination date set forth in Section 4.2 above.
Evaluation Data. To the best of Sellers' knowledge and belief, each of the maps, and all of the geological and production data, pricing data, reserve data or other data or documentation heretofore furnished by Sellers to Buyer ("Evaluation Data"), was complete, and the information reported therein was correct, in all material respects as of the date of such delivery.
Evaluation Data. Bank shall cooperate with EFS and the Nominated Purchaser to provide EFS and Nominated Purchaser with access (subject to customary confidentiality agreements) to all Program-related data and information (other than Bank’s proprietary work product) reasonably requested by the Nominated Purchaser for the sole purpose of due diligence regarding the purchase of the Accounts, provided that such information is not otherwise reasonably available from EFS or its Affiliates.
Evaluation Data. Respondents must provide the following information to Toronto Hydro for the evaluation of the transformer losses and characteristics. Proposals lacking the required data may not be evaluated. • Guaranteed value of no-load losses at 100% rated voltage and corrected to 85 °C. Exciting current. Guaranteed value of load losses and impedance at rated current and voltage, corrected to 85 °C. Percentage regulation at 0.8 and unity power factors. Efficiency at 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, full-load and 5/4 full-load. Material used for high-voltage and low-voltage windings. Bushing technical data. Layout drawing showing dimensions and weights and location of all devices and features Location of plant where transformers are to be manufactured. Delivery terms.
Evaluation Data. The evaluations shall include a review of applicable school, District, and City data, including the following:
12.1.1. Completed SRO Interaction Feedback Forms, as described in Section 13;
12.1.2. SRO Outcomes Data provided by the FCPS.
12.1.3. Applicable school discipline data, as determined by the District.
Evaluation Data. Two types of evaluation data were used: For efforts, person hours were counted. As many of the tools (crawling, XXXXX) take significant computation effort, the effort was not measured in machine time but in the time where people were involved. Machine time is usually much higher. For quality, human evaluation was used in addition to automatic scores (BLEU, using one reference translation). As only comparative (COMP) evaluation was done, the test persons had to decide which one of two translation outputs was better, if any. Quality change was calculated by: number improvements minus number deteriorations, divided by total amount sentences. This is a standard measure used in industrial MT comparisons. For evaluation, the Sisyphos-II tools made by Linguatec were used. Two evaluators were engaged to do the evaluations. For the quality comparison, a test set of 1500 sentences from the automotive domain was used. The test set was taken from crawled automotive texts, so it contains spelling errors, wrong segmentation etc.; no cleaning was done. None of those 1500 sentences is in the training corpus. This test set was used for KFZ and UNK. For DCU system adaptation, 500 sentences out of the test set were used as development set, so the test set was reduced to 1000 sentences. This reduced test set was used for DCU and GLO.
Evaluation Data. Information provided by other people involved in the recruitment process about your suitability for employment with Host Companies and your status within the recruitment process. Optional information provided by you about your views on the recruitment process. Optional information provided by you relating to special employment requirements. Information provided by you which is required for to create a contract for employment with a Host Company.
