U-compare Sample Clauses

U-compare. U-Compare5 (Xxxx et al., 2009a) is a system based on UIMA but aims to provide a platform that is easier to use and allows users to make visualizations and comparison between the tools. It uses the UIMA tools for text mining and natural language processing. U-Compare contains its own graphical user interface and workflow editor which can be used to create workflows to be used with UIMA and shared with other users. Several components can be run in parallel and their respective results can be compared with each other and evaluated. U-Compare is a joint project between the University of Tokyo, the Center for Computational Pharma- cology (CCP) at the University of Colorado Health Science Center, and the National Centre for Text Mining (NaCTeM) at the University of Manchester. The platform itself, i.e. the U-Compare type sys- tem, is released under the Apache license and is free for research purposes, but cannot be re- distributed or re-used if any changes have been done to its code. The comparison generator, the GUI and the other shared parts can be used freely for research, too, but these components must not be re- distributed or re-used. U-Compare provides a number of corpus readers (Biological Entity Annotated Corpora, Biological Event Annotated Corpora, BIO, XMI, and plain text) and writers (XMI, Inline XML, Annotation Printer, BIO), syntactic tools (sentence splitters, tokenizers, POS taggers, lemmatizers, CFG parsers, dependency parsers, and deep parsers), semantic tools (named entity recognizers, biological event recognizers, an abbreviation detector). These are UIMA tools that have been integrated into U- Compare. Additionally, the U-Compare Annotation Viewer to visualise annotation instances, MoriV to visualise HPSG feature structures and CFG tree structures, and Annotation Comparator are inte- grated into the system. Additional UIMA compatible components can be used with U-Compare with little effort. Other com- ponents can be wrapped as well by making them compatible with the U-Compare type system (Kano 5 xxxx://x-xxxxxxx.xxx et al., 2009b). In order to create compatible interfaces, a new UIMA Aggregate Analysis Engine com- ponent needs to be created that comprises three components: a type systems converter to convert the U-Compare output to the input format required by the tool, the original component, and another con- verter that converts the new component's output into the U-Compare type system. It can then be de- ployed as a UIMA Soap web service,...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to U-compare

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order.

  • Baseline For purposes of measuring a reduction in net tax revenue, the interim final rule measures actual changes in tax revenue relative to a revenue baseline (baseline). The baseline will be calculated as fiscal year 2019 (FY 2019) tax revenue indexed for inflation in each year of the covered period, with inflation calculated using the Bureau of Economic Analysis’s Implicit Price Deflator.163 FY 2019 was chosen as the starting year for the baseline because it is the last full fiscal year prior to the COVID– 162 See, e.g., Tax Policy Center, How do state earned income tax credits work?, https:// xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx/xxxxxxxx-xxxx/xxx-xx- state-earned-income-tax-credits-work/ (last visited May 9, 2021).

  • Job Evaluation The work of the provincial job evaluation steering committee (the JE Committee) will continue during the term of this Framework Agreement. The objectives of the JE Committee are as follows: • Review the results of the phase one and phase two pilots and outcomes of the committee work. Address any anomalies identified with the JE tool, process, or benchmarks. • Rate the provincial benchmarks and create a job hierarchy for the provincial benchmarks. • Gather data from all school districts and match existing job descriptions to the provincial benchmarks. • Identify the job hierarchy for local job descriptions for all school districts. • Compare the local job hierarchy to the benchmark-matched hierarchy. • Develop a methodology to convert points to pay bands - The confirmed method must be supported by current compensation best practices. • Identify training requirements to support implementation of the JE plan and develop training resources as required. Once the objectives outlined above are completed, the JE Committee will mutually determine whether a local, regional or provincial approach to the steps outlined above is appropriate. It is recognized that the work of the committee is technical, complicated, lengthy and onerous. To accomplish the objectives, the parties agree that existing JE funds can be accessed by the JE committee to engage consultant(s) to complete this work. It is further recognized that this process does not impact the established management right of employers to determine local job requirements and job descriptions nor does this process alter any existing collective agreement rights or established practices. When the JE plan is ready to be implemented, and if an amendment to an existing collective agreement is required, the JE Committee will work with the local School District and Local Union to make recommendations for implementation. Any recommendations will also be provided to the Provincial Labour Management Committee (PLMC). As mutually agreed by the provincial parties and the JE Committee, the disbursement of available JE funds shall be retroactive to January 2, 2020. The committee will utilize available funds to provide 50% of the wage differential for the position falling the furthest below the wage rate established by the provincial JE process and will continue this process until all JE fund monies at the time have been disbursed. The committee will follow compensation best practices to avoid problems such as inversion. The committee will report out to the provincial parties regularly during the term of the Framework Agreement. Should any concerns arise during the work of the committee they will be referred to the PLMC. Create a maintenance program to support ongoing implementation of the JE plan at a local, regional or provincial level. The maintenance program will include a process for addressing the wage rates of incumbents in positions which are impacted by implementation of the JE plan. The provincial parties confirm that $4,419,859 of ongoing annual funds will be used to implement the Job Evaluation Plan. Effective July 1, 2022, there will be a one-time pause of the annual $4,419,859 JE funding. This amount has been allocated to the local table bargaining money. The annual funding will recommence July 1, 2023.

  • Metrics The DISTRICT and PARTNER will partake in monthly coordination meetings at mutually agreed upon times and dates to discuss the progress of the program Scope of Work. DISTRICT and PARTNER will also mutually establish criteria and process for ongoing program assessment/evaluation such as, but not limited to the DISTRICT’s assessment metrics and other state metrics [(Measures of Academic Progress – English, SBAC – 11th grade, Redesignation Rates, mutually developed rubric score/s, student attendance, and Social Emotional Learning (SEL) data)]. The DISTRICT and PARTNER will also engage in annual review of program content to ensure standards alignment that comply with DISTRICT approved coursework. The PARTNER will provide their impact data based upon these metrics.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. Xxxxxxxxx & Xxxxxx will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Performance Reporting The State of California is required to submit the following financial reports to FEMA:

  • Constructability Review Prepare detailed interdisciplinary constructability review within Fourteen (14) days of receipt of the plans from the District that:

  • Annual Performance Evaluation On either a fiscal year or calendar year basis, (consistently applied from year to year), the Bank shall conduct an annual evaluation of Executive’s performance. The annual performance evaluation proceedings shall be included in the minutes of the Board meeting that next follows such annual performance review.

  • Progress Reporting 5. The IP will submit to UNICEF narrative progress reports against the planned activities contained in the Programme Document, using the PDPR. Unless otherwise agreed between the Parties in writing, these reports will be submitted at the end of every Quarter. The final report will be submitted no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the end the Programme and will be provided together with the FACE form.

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is an NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram with the exception of the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”) to be completed by the LEA, and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by XXX xxxxxxxx to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. XXX shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by XXX.

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