Example of results Sample Clauses

Example of results. From each simulation spatial filtering is applied for measuring the contribution of each term coming from the filtered approach. It allows also to measure the correlation between each term in order to give some idea for developing a model. The following results are coming from a simulation with the mesh M4. The material properties are those described above, and the numerical models as well. Only the solid volume fraction is different, αp = 5% and αq = 1%.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Example of results

  • Publication of Results The National Aeronautics and Space Act (51 U.S.C. § 20112) requires NASA to provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and the results thereof. As such, NASA may publish unclassified and non-Proprietary Data resulting from work performed under this Agreement. The Parties will coordinate publication of results allowing a reasonable time to review and comment.

  • Notification of Results Within 10 days after satisfactory inspection and/or testing of Interconnection Facilities built by the Interconnection Customer (including, if applicable, inspection and/or testing after correction of defects or failures), the Interconnected Transmission Owner shall confirm in writing to the Interconnection Customer and Transmission Provider that the successfully inspected and tested facilities are acceptable for energization.

  • Ownership of Results Any interest of Contractor or its subcontractors, in the Deliverables, including any drawings, plans, specifications, blueprints, studies, reports, memoranda, computation sheets, computer files and media or other documents prepared by Contractor or its subcontractors for the purposes of this Agreement, shall become the property of and will be transmitted to City. However, unless expressly prohibited elsewhere in this Agreement, Contractor may retain and use copies for reference and as documentation of its experience and capabilities.

  • Expected Results VA’s agreement with DoD to provide educational assistance is a statutory requirement of Chapter 1606, Title 10, U.S.C., Chapter 1607, Title 10, U.S.C., Chapter 30, Title 38, U.S.C. and Chapter 33, Title 38, U.S.C (Post-9/11 GI Xxxx). These laws require VA to make payments to eligible veterans, service members, guard, reservist, and family members under the transfer of entitlement provisions. The responsibility of determining basic eligibility for Chapter 1606 is placed on the DoD. The responsibility of determining basic eligibility for Chapter 30 and Chapter 33 is placed on VA, while the responsibility of providing initial eligibility data for Chapter 30 and Chapter 33 is placed on DoD. Thus, the two agencies must exchange data to ensure that VA makes payments only to those who are eligible for a program. Without an exchange of enrollment and eligibility data, VA would not be able to establish or verify applicant and recipient eligibility for the programs. Subject to the due process requirements, set forth in Article VII.B.1., 38 U.S.C. §3684A, VA may suspend, terminate, or make a final denial of any financial assistance on the basis of data produced by a computer matching program with DoD. To minimize administrative costs of implementation of the law and to maximize the service to the veteran or service member, a system of data exchanges and subsequent computer matching programs was developed. The purposes of the computer matching programs are to minimize the costs of administering the Xxxxxxxxxx GI Xxxx — Active Duty, the Xxxxxxxxxx GI Xxxx — Selected Reserve, Reserve Educational Assistance Program, and the Post-9/11 GI Xxxx program; facilitate accurate payment to eligible veterans or service members training under the Chapter of the Xxxxxxxxxx GI Xxxx — Active Duty, the Xxxxxxxxxx GI Xxxx — Selected Reserve, Reserve Educational Assistance Program, and the Post-9/11 GI Xxxx program; and to avoid payment to those who lose eligibility. The current automated systems, both at VA and DoD, have been developed over the last twenty-two years. The systems were specifically designed to utilize computer matching in transferring enrollment and eligibility data to facilitate accurate payments and avoid incorrect payments. The source agency, DMDC, stores eligibility data on its computer based system of record. The cost of providing this data to VA electronically are minimal when compared to the cost DMDC would incur if the data were forwarded to VA in a hard-copy manner. By comparing records electronically, VA avoids the personnel costs of inputting data manually as well as the storage costs of the DMDC documents. This results in a VA estimated annual savings of $26,724,091 to VA in mailing and data entry costs. DoD reported an estimated annual savings of $12,350,000. A cost-benefit analysis is at Attachment 1. In the 32 years since the inception of the Chapter 30 program, the cost savings of using computer matching to administer the benefit payments for these educational assistance programs have remained significant. The implementation of Chapter 33 has impacted the Chapter 30 program over the past 8 years (fiscal year 2010 through fiscal year 2017). Statistics show a decrease of 23 percent in the number of persons who ultimately use Chapter 30 from fiscal year 2015 to 2016. The number of persons who use Chapter 33 has consistently been above 700,000 in the past four years. VA foresees continued cost savings due to the number of persons eligible for the education programs.‌

  • - OWNERSHIP/USE OF THE RESULTS II.3.1 Unless stipulated otherwise in this agreement, ownership of the results of the action, including industrial and intellectual property rights, and of the reports and other documents relating to it shall be vested in the beneficiary.

  • Quantitative Results i. Total number and percentage of instances in which the IRO determined that the Paid Claims submitted by CHSI (Claim Submitted) differed from what should have been the correct claim (Correct Claim), regardless of the effect on the payment.

  • Justification and Anticipated Results The Privacy Act requires that each matching agreement specify the justification for the program and the anticipated results, including a specific estimate of any savings. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(o)(1)(B).

  • Performance Metrics In the event Grantee fails to timely achieve the following performance metrics (the “Performance Metrics”), then in accordance with Section 8.4 below Grantee shall upon written demand by Triumph repay to Triumph all portions of Grant theretofore funded to and received by Grantee:

  • Targets a) Seller’s supplier diversity spending target for Work supporting the construction of the Project prior to the Commercial Operation Date is ____ percent (___%) as measured relative to Seller’s total expenditures on construction of the Project prior to the Commercial Operation Date, and;

  • Positive Test Results In the event an employee tests positive for drug use, the employee will be provided, in writing, notice of their right to explain the test results. The employee may indicate any relevant circumstance, including over the counter or prescription medication taken within the last thirty (30) days, or any other information relevant to the reliability of, or explanation for, a positive test result.

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