Relevance Filtering Sample Clauses

Relevance Filtering. Rodin's external provers (PP, newPP, and sometimes also ML) tend to perform poorly in the presence of irrelevant hypotheses. For PP and newPP the user can still manually select the hypotheses he considers relevant, but that is a tedious and error-prone process, in particular for large models. Several heuristics for selecting relevant hypotheses have been proposed in the literature[2] [3] [4] [5] . The relevance filter plug-in implements these and other heuristics, and provides a default configuration that has been shown to be almost optimal on a given collection of models from different domains[6] . The relevance filter plug-in has also significantly increased the number of automatically discharged proof obligations on models of deployment partners, which had not been used for fine tuning the heuristics.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Relevance Filtering. The relevance filter heuristics we have considered do not work out of the box - their parameters need to be carefully adjusted. The major design decision concerned how to carry out the process of fine tuning. We started with an ad-hoc benchmark containing models of several problem domains and aimed for maximizing the number of automatically discharged proof obligations among this benchmark while minimizing the amount of time spent for proving. We experimented with different filter configurations, i.e., combinations of heuristics, heuristic parameters, provers (PP, newPP, or ML) and prover timeouts. Finally, the parameters and timeouts were chosen such that • the number of automatically discharged proof obligations is almost maximal among all considered filter configurations, and • decreasing the timeouts would significantly decrease the number of automatically discharged proof obligations. To rebut criticism of overfitting, we tested the final filter configuration on a validation benchmark (based on deployment partners' models), which was chosen independently from the benchmark used for fine-tuning. We observed that the final filter configuration significantly increases the number of automatically discharged proof obligations among the validation benchmark in comparison to not using relevance filtering.

Related to Relevance Filtering

  • SERVICE MONITORING, ANALYSES AND ORACLE SOFTWARE 11.1 We continuously monitor the Services to facilitate Oracle’s operation of the Services; to help resolve Your service requests; to detect and address threats to the functionality, security, integrity, and availability of the Services as well as any content, data, or applications in the Services; and to detect and address illegal acts or violations of the Acceptable Use Policy. Oracle monitoring tools do not collect or store any of Your Content residing in the Services, except as needed for such purposes. Oracle does not monitor, and does not address issues with, non-Oracle software provided by You or any of Your Users that is stored in, or run on or through, the Services. Information collected by Oracle monitoring tools (excluding Your Content) may also be used to assist in managing Oracle’s product and service portfolio, to help Oracle address deficiencies in its product and service offerings, and for license management purposes.

  • Accessibility of Web-Based Information and Applications For State Agency Authorized User Acquisitions: Any web-based information and applications development, or programming delivered pursuant to the contract or procurement, will comply with New York State Enterprise IT Policy NYS-P08-005, Accessibility of Web-Based Information and Applications as follows: Any web-based information and applications development, or programming delivered pursuant to the contract or procurement, will comply with New York State Enterprise IT Policy NYS-P08- 005, Accessibility of Web-Based Information and Applications as such policy may be amended, modified or superseded, which requires that state agency web-based information and applications are accessible to persons with disabilities. Web-based information and applications must conform to New York State Enterprise IT Policy NYS-P08-005 as determined by quality assurance testing. Such quality assurance testing will be conducted by the State Agency Authorized User and the results of such testing must be satisfactory to the Authorized User before web-based information and applications will be considered a qualified deliverable under the contract or procurement.

  • Line Information Database 9.1 LIDB is a transaction-oriented database accessible through Common Channel Signaling (CCS) networks. For access to LIDB, e-Tel must purchase appropriate signaling links pursuant to Section 10 of this Attachment. LIDB contains records associated with End User Line Numbers and Special Billing Numbers. LIDB accepts queries from other Network Elements and provides appropriate responses. The query originator need not be the owner of LIDB data. LIDB queries include functions such as screening billed numbers that provides the ability to accept Collect or Third Number Billing calls and validation of Telephone Line Number based non-proprietary calling cards. The interface for the LIDB functionality is the interface between BellSouth’s CCS network and other CCS networks. LIDB also interfaces to administrative systems.

  • ODUF Physical File Characteristics 6.2.1 ODUF will be distributed to Image Access via Secure File Transfer Protocol (FTP). The ODUF feed will be a variable block format. The data on the ODUF feed will be in a non-compacted EMI format (one hundred seventy-five (175) byte format plus modules). It will be created on a daily basis Monday through Friday except holidays. Details such as dataset name and delivery schedule will be addressed during negotiations of the distribution medium. There will be a maximum of one (1) dataset per workday per OCN. If BellSouth determines the Secure FTP Mailbox is nearing capacity levels, BellSouth may move the customer to CONNECT:Direct file delivery.

  • Exception Where Databases Contain Sufficient Information A Reporting Financial Institution is not required to perform the paper record search described in subparagraph D.2. of this section if the Reporting Financial Institution’s electronically searchable information includes the following:

  • Physical File Characteristics 6.2.1 The Optional Daily Usage File will be distributed to <<customer_name>> via an agreed medium with CONNECT:Direct being the preferred transport method. The Daily Usage Feed will be a variable block format (2476) with an LRECL of 2472. The data on the Daily Usage Feed will be in a non-compacted EMI format (175 byte format plus modules). It will be created on a daily basis (Monday through Friday except holidays). Details such as dataset name and delivery schedule will be addressed during negotiations of the distribution medium. There will be a maximum of one dataset per workday per OCN.

  • Separate Grievance File All documents, communications and records dealing with the processing of a grievance shall be filed in a separate grievance file and shall not be kept in the personnel file of any of the participants.

  • Grievance File Records involving the processing of an employee's grievance, such as the grievance form, step appeals/responses, and settlement documents, will be kept in a file separate from the employee’s personnel file. It is not the intent of this section to exclude from the employee's personnel file final disciplinary action documents, including those that result from a settlement agreement.

  • COMPUTER GRAPHICS FILES The Engineer agrees to comply with Attachment G, Computer Graphics Files for Document and Information Exchange, if determined by the State to be applicable to this contract.

  • Grievance Files Written grievances and responses will be maintained separately from the employee’s personnel file.

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