Model testing Sample Clauses

Model testing. The model was tested with a dataset containing empirical data from which the ART score was derived for each observation (e.g. weight fraction) along with the measured output (e.g. inhalation exposure). The dataset used to test the model contained more than 600 data points. Where this was the case, the missing inputs were imputed by empirical sampling from existing values in the available data. To summarize the output, the geometric mean, median, 2.5th percentile and 97.5th percentile were calculated. Thereafter, the geometric mean of the output against the true measured values with 95% confidence intervals, medians and geometric means of the output against the true values (all on log10 scale) were plotted for comparison. For each sub-scenario, 10,000 iterations were used. The models were only compared or tested with available exposure data. Thus no calibration or transforming/fitting was performed. Results from the model testing are presented in figures 1 to 4. For all the sub-scenario, The y-axis represents the measured potential inhalation exposure. The x-axis represents the geometric mean of the model outputs. Blue dots indicate imputed values, red dots indicate that art scores were available. Figures 1 to 4 show the result of the model testing. Art default values for HHA air concentration (Table 1) were tested against measured data representative of HHA application activities.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Model testing. The Contractor shall prepare a Model Test Program Plan (DI-031). The Contractor shall conduct the following model tests (including construction of all hull and propeller models):
Sample 1
Model testing. ‌ The scripting approach can also be useful for model testing and testcase generation. For model testing, we can save and replay execution traces. Saving a trace is done by generating a groovy script and replaying is done by executing that script. In contrast to previous approaches [Elb09] this scripting approach is not limited to simple linear traces because we have the full expressivity of the host language at our hands. The new ProB plug-in has a built in JUnit4 test runner. There is also built in support for the Spock test framework1. This means that users can write JUnit4 or Spock tests using the ProB abstractions. Tests are written within groovy scripts. In order to use the BUnit test runner, the user has to write a test class that is compatible with JUnit4 or Spock and then create an new instance of the test class in the last line of the script. Then, when the script is run, the groovy engine will recognize the class and run it through the test runner. An example of a model test for the watertank example from chapter 6 written as a Spock specification could look like this import spock.lang.Specification import de.prob.scripting.Api class WaterTankTest extends Specification { static Api api def ctrl def setup() { ctrl = api.b_load("waterTankCtrl.mch") as History ctrl = ctrl.anyEvent(); // setup constants ctrl = ctrl.anyEvent(); // initialize machine 1xxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx } def "Initially the pump is turned on"() { expect: // This test will fail! The value is FALSE assert ctrl.getCurrentState().value("pump") == "TRUE" } def "If we get below low level, pump is turned on"() { when: ctrl = ctrl.fmiReadInputs("l=799") // set level < Low ctrl = ctrl.readLevel().decide().writePump() // decide then: assert ctrl.getCurrentState().value("pump") == "TRUE" } } WaterTankTest.api = api new WaterTankTest() 1). When an error or a failure is produced, a stacktrace or explanation with the desired information is also displayed. Using the specification for BUnit tests, it should not be difficult for users to generate test cases. Figure 7.1: Model Testing UI Chapter 8‌ 8.1 Abstract‌ One way to produce FMUs from a B component is via code generation: instead of simulating a B component we generate code from it and use that code within an FMU unit. The advantage of this is obviously performance. The RODIN, and DEPLOY projects have laid solid foundations for fur- ther theoretical, and practical (methodological and tooling) advances with Event-B; we investigated code...
Sample 1

Related to Model testing

  • ODUF Testing 6.6.1 Upon request from TWTC, AT&T shall send ODUF test files to TWTC. The Parties agree to review and discuss the ODUF file content and/or format. For testing of usage results, AT&T shall request that TWTC set up a production (live) file. The live test may consist of TWTC’s employees making test calls for the types of services TWTC requests on ODUF. These test calls are logged by TWTC, and the logs are provided to AT&T. These logs will be used to verify the files. Testing will be completed within thirty (30) days from the date on which the initial test file was sent.

  • Drug Testing (A) The state and the PBA agree to drug testing of employees in accordance with section 112.0455, F.S., the Drug-Free Workplace Act. (B) All classes covered by this Agreement are designated special risk classes for drug testing purposes. Special risk means employees who are required as a condition of employment to be certified under Chapter 633 or Chapter 943, F.S. (C) An employee shall have the right to grieve any disciplinary action taken under section 112.0455, the Drug-Free Workplace Act, subject to the limitations on the grievability of disciplinary actions in Article 10. If an employee is not disciplined but is denied a demotion, reassignment, or promotion as a result of a positive confirmed drug test, the employee shall have the right to grieve such action in accordance with Article 6.

  • Stability Testing Patheon may be requested to conduct stability testing on the Products in accordance with the protocols set out in the Specifications for the separate fees and during the time periods set out in Schedule C to a Product Agreement. Patheon will not make any changes to these testing protocols without prior written approval from Client. If a confirmed stability test failure occurs, Patheon will notify Client within one Business Day, after which Patheon and Client will jointly determine the proceedings and methods to be undertaken to investigate the cause of the failure, including which party will bear the cost of the investigation. Patheon will not be liable for these costs unless it has failed to perform the Manufacturing Services in accordance with the Specifications, cGMPs, and Applicable Laws. Patheon will give Client ail stability test data and results at Client’s request.

  • Alcohol Testing Alcohol testing will be conducted by using an evidential breath-testing device (EBT) approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. A screening test will be conducted first. This initial screening may be accomplished using a saliva test kit. If the result is an alcohol concentration level of less than 0.02 percent, the test is considered a negative test. If the alcohol concentration level is 0.02 percent or more, a second confirmation test using the EBT will be conducted. The procedures that will be utilized by the lab for collection and testing of the specimen are attached hereto as Appendix A.

  • Random Testing Notwithstanding any provisions of the Collective Agreement or any special agreements appended thereto, section 4.6 of the Canadian Model will not be applied by agreement. If applied to a worker dispatched by the Union, it will be applied or deemed to be applied unilaterally by the Employer. The Union retains the right to grieve the legality of any imposition of random testing in accordance with the Grievance Procedure set out in this Collective Agreement.

  • Meter Testing Company shall provide at least twenty-four (24) hours' notice to Seller prior to any test it may perform on the revenue meters or metering equipment. Seller shall have the right to have a representative present during each such test. Seller may request, and Company shall perform, if requested, tests in addition to the every fifth-year test and Seller shall pay the cost of such tests. Company may, in its sole discretion, perform tests in addition to the fifth year test and Company shall pay the cost of such tests. If any of the revenue meters or metering equipment is found to be inaccurate at any time, as determined by testing in accordance with this Section 10.2 (Meter Testing), Company shall promptly cause such equipment to be made accurate, and the period of inaccuracy, as well as an estimate for correct meter readings, shall be determined in accordance with Section 10.3 (Corrections).

  • Product Testing No later than [**] prior to a scheduled Delivery ARIAD US shall send to ARIAD SWISSCO the Delivery Documents for review. Following such review, unless within [**] of receipt of the Delivery Documents ARIAD SWISSCO gives written notice of rejection of the Product to be delivered, stating the reasons for such rejection, the Delivery shall proceed, and both Parties shall organize the same. Upon arrival at ARIAD SWISSCO nominated site it shall visually inspect the shipment of the Product to identify any damage to the external packaging. ARIAD SWISSCO may reject any shipment (or portion thereof) of the Product that is damaged by providing to ARIAD US reasonable evidence of damage within [**] after Delivery of such Product. If ARIAD SWISSCO does not so reject any shipment (or portion thereof) of the Product within [**] of Delivery of such Product, ARIAD SWISSCO shall be deemed to have accepted such shipment of the Product; provided, however, that in the case of the Product having any Latent Defect, ARIAD SWISSCO shall notify ARIAD US promptly once it becomes aware that a Product contains a Latent Defect and subsequently may reject such Product by giving written notice to ARIAD US of ARIAD SWISSCO’s rejection of such Product and shipping a representative sample of such Product or other evidence of Non-Conformance to ARIAD US within [**] after becoming aware of such Latent Defect, which notice shall include a description of the Latent Defect.

  • Acceptance Testing At the time of installation of a LIS trunk group, and at no additional charge, acceptance tests will be performed to ensure that the service is operational and meets the applicable technical parameters.

  • Performance Testing 7.2.1 The Design-Builder shall direct and supervise the tests and, if necessary, the retests of the Plant using Design-Builder’s supervisory personnel and the Air Emissions Tester shall conduct the air emissions test, in each case, in accordance with the testing procedures set forth in Exhibit A (the “Performance Tests”), to demonstrate, at a minimum, compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria. Owner is responsible for obtaining Air Emissions Tester and for ensuring Air Emissions Tester’s timely performance. Design-Builder shall cooperate with the Air Emissions Tester to facilitate performance of all air emissions tests. Design-Builder shall not be held responsible for the actions of Owner’s employees and third parties involved in the Performance Testing, including but not limited to Air Emissions Tester. 7.2.2 No later than thirty (30) Days prior to the earlier of the Scheduled Substantial Completion Date or Substantial Completion, Design-Builder shall provide to Owner for review a detailed testing plan for the Performance Tests (other than for air emissions). Owner and Design-Builder shall agree upon a testing plan that shall be consistent with the Performance Test Protocol contained in Exhibit A hereto. After such agreement has been reached, Design-Builder shall notify the Owner five (5) business days prior to the date Design-Builder intends to commence the Performance Tests and shall notify the Owner upon commencement of the Performance Tests. Owner and Independent Engineer each have the right to witness all testing, including the Performance Tests and any equipment testing, whether at the Site or at the Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s premises during the course of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, Owner shall bear the costs of providing a witness to any such testing and all such witnesses shall comply at all times with Design-Builder’s, Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s safety and security procedures and other reasonable requirements, and otherwise conduct themselves in a manner that does not interfere with Design-Builder’s, Subcontractor’s or equipment supplier’s activities or operations. 7.2.3 Design-Builder shall provide to Owner a Performance Test report (excluding results from air emissions testing), including all applicable test data, calculations and certificates indicating the results of the Performance Tests and, within five (5) business days of Owner’s receipt of such results, Owner, Independent Engineer and Design-Builder will jointly inspect such Work and review the results of the Performance Tests to verify that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have been met. If Owner or Independent Engineer reasonably determines that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have not been met, Owner shall notify Design-Builder the reasons why Owner determined that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have not been met and Design-Builder shall promptly take such action or perform such additional work as will achieve the Performance Guarantee Criteria and shall issue to the Owner another notice in accordance with Section 7.2.2; provided however that if the notice relates to a retest, the notice may be provided no less than two (2) business days prior to the Performance Tests. Such procedure shall be repeated as necessary until Owner and Independent Engineer verifies that the Performance Guarantee Criteria have been met. 7.2.4 If Owner, for whatever reason, prevents Design-Builder from demonstrating the Performance Guarantee Criteria within thirty (30) Days of Design-Builder’s notice that the Plant is ready for Performance Testing, then Design-Builder shall be excused from demonstrating compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria during such period of time that Design-Builder is prevented from demonstrating compliance with the Performance Guarantee Criteria; provided however that Design-Builder will be deemed to have fulfilled all of its obligations to demonstrate that the Plant meets the Performance Guarantee Criteria should such period of time during which Design-Builder is prevented from demonstrating the Performance Criteria exceed thirty (30) Days or extend beyond the Final Completion Date.

  • Follow-up Testing An employee shall submit to unscheduled follow-up drug and/or alcohol testing if, within the previous 24-month period, the employee voluntarily disclosed drug or alcohol problems, entered into or completed a rehabilitation program for drug or alcohol abuse, failed or refused a preappointment drug test, or was disciplined for violating the provisions of this Agreement and Employer work rules. The Employer may require an employee who is subject to follow-up testing to submit to no more than six unscheduled drug or alcohol tests within any 12 month period.

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