The Proposed Protocols Sample Clauses

The Proposed Protocols. In this section, the proposed protocols, FDAL and VRFC, will be introduced in more detail to solve the mixed faults on links in a general network with FDA compliance. The parameters used and the assumptions made are as follows: ■ Processors used in the underlying network are assumed to be fault-free. (This can be achieved using the FDAMIX protocol [5]) ■ Let Þ be the set of all processors in the general network, and  Þ =n. ■ Each processor in the network can be uniquely identified. ■ Each processor in the general network has exactly the same initial value. (Protocol GPBA [11] can be used to achieve this status.) ■ Let La be the maximum number of arbitrary faulty links in the general network. ■ Let Ld be the maximum number of dormant faulty links in the general network. ■ Let c be the connectivity of the general network, where c > 2La+ Ld.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
The Proposed Protocols. In this section, we shall introduce our new protocols, Relay Fault-tolerance Channel (RFC) and Eventual General Agreement Protocol (EGAP), to solve the EBA problem with dual failure mode on both processors and communication media in a general network.
Sample 1
The Proposed Protocols. In this section, the detailed descriptions of our proposed protocols Group Oriented Agreement Protocol for processor (GOAPP) and Relay Fault tolerance Channel for Processor (RFCP) are shown here. Noticeable, in the BA problem, the source processor only transmits the message in the first round of message exchange. Because if the source processor is a fault-free processor then the agreement value of the source processor is its initial value, if the source processor is a faulty processor then we do not care the agreement value of the source processor [10].
Sample 1

Related to The Proposed Protocols

  • COVID-19 Protocols Contractor will abide by all applicable COVID-19 protocols set forth in the District’s Reopening and COVID-19 Mitigation Plan and the safety guidelines for COVID-19 prevention established by the California Department of Public Health and the Ventura County Department of Public Health.

  • Protocols Each party hereby agrees that the inclusion of additional protocols may be required to make this Agreement specific. All such protocols shall be negotiated, determined and agreed upon by both parties hereto.

  • Research Use Reporting To assure adherence to NIH GDS Policy, the PI agrees to provide annual Progress Updates as part of the annual Project Renewal or Project Close-out processes, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year data access period. The PI who is seeking Renewal or Close-out of a project agree to complete the appropriate online forms and provide specific information such as how the data have been used, including publications or presentations that resulted from the use of the requested dataset(s), a summary of any plans for future research use (if the PI is seeking renewal), any violations of the terms of access described within this Agreement and the implemented remediation, and information on any downstream intellectual property generated from the data. The PI also may include general comments regarding suggestions for improving the data access process in general. Information provided in the progress updates helps NIH evaluate program activities and may be considered by the NIH GDS governance committees as part of NIH’s effort to provide ongoing stewardship of data sharing activities subject to the NIH GDS Policy.

  • Proposed Services A description of the Contractor’s proposed services to accomplish the specified work requirements, including dates of completion.

  • Timeline Contractor must perform the Services and deliver the Deliverables according to the following timeline: • •

  • For Product Development Projects and Project Demonstrations  Published documents, including date, title, and periodical name.  Estimated or actual energy and cost savings, and estimated statewide energy savings once market potential has been realized. Identify all assumptions used in the estimates.  Greenhouse gas and criteria emissions reductions.  Other non-energy benefits such as reliability, public safety, lower operational cost, environmental improvement, indoor environmental quality, and societal benefits.  Data on potential job creation, market potential, economic development, and increased state revenue as a result of the project.  A discussion of project product downloads from websites, and publications in technical journals.  A comparison of project expectations and performance. Discuss whether the goals and objectives of the Agreement have been met and what improvements are needed, if any.

  • Protocol No action to coerce or censor or penalize any negotiation participant shall be made or implied by any other member as a result of participation in the negotiation process.

  • Development Plan document specifying the work program, schedule, and relevant investments required for the Development and the Production of a Discovery or set of Discoveries of Oil and Gas in the Contract Area, including its abandonment.

  • Benchmarking Process 2.2.1 The Supplier shall produce and send to the Authority for Approval, a draft plan for the Benchmark Review.

  • Parameters In calculating the MtM Exposure for each Transaction, the following parameters are set on the Transaction Date: ▪ On-Peak Initial Xxxx Xxxxx ▪ Off-Peak/On-Peak Price Ratio ▪ Off-Peak Initial Xxxx Xxxxx ▪ MW-Measure: initial Capacity PLC Per Tranche ▪ On-Peak Estimated Energy Quantity Per MW-Measure for each of the twelve calendar months ▪ Off-Peak Estimated Energy Quantity Per MW-Measure for each of the twelve calendar months ▪ Number of awarded Tranches In calculating the MtM Exposure for each Transaction, the following parameters are set each Trading Day subsequent to the Transaction Date: ▪ On-Peak Forward Price ▪ Off-Peak Forward Price ▪ Current Capacity PLC Per Tranche ▪ On-Peak Estimated Energy Quantity ▪ Off-Peak Estimated Energy Quantity Process to Update the On-Peak Initial Mark Prices and Off-Peak Initial Mark Prices on a Daily Basis On each Trading Day subsequent to the Transaction Date, the Pricing Agent will contact four Reference Market-Makers to obtain price quotes for on-peak and off-peak energy for PJM Western Hub. The Pricing Agent may not rely upon quotes from Seller or any Affiliate of Seller. The updated mark for a month will be equal to the average mark for that month over all sources from which a quote is available. If a monthly quote is available from any source, only the monthly quote or monthly quotes shall be used. Where quotes provide a bid and ask, the average shall be used. Where a quote for an individual month is unavailable, but the month is quoted as part of a “packaged” quote (e.g., January 2011 is only available in the form of a January/February 2011 “packaged” quote or an annual quote): ▪ If the other month/months of the package quote is/are also unavailable, then the marks for all months of the package will be calculated by multiplying the packaged quote by the ratio of the corresponding month to the corresponding calculated package quote from the previous day. Example: There are no On-Peak quotes available on day X during the contract for July 2011 or August 2011. However, there is an On-Peak July/August 2011 packaged quote of $73.00/MWh available. The On-Peak marks from day X-1 for July 2011 and August 2011 were $73.50/MWh and $76.50/MWh respectively. The day X On-Peak mark for July 2011 is set at 73.00 * [73.50] / [( (73.50 * 352) + (76.50 * 336) ) / (352+336) ] = 73 * (73.50/ 74.97) = $71.57/MWh. The day X On-Peak mark for August 2011 is set at 73.00 * [76.50] / [( (73.50 * 352) + (76.50*336) ) / (352+336) ] = 73 * (76.50 / 74.97) = $74.49/MWh. ▪ If the other month/months of the package quote is/are available, then the mark for the month will be set such that the average of the month and the other month(s) (weighted for either the On-Peak Hours or Off-Peak Hours as applicable) equals the packaged quote (see calculation example below).

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