Comparison Analysis Sample Clauses

The Comparison Analysis clause establishes a framework for evaluating and contrasting different items, services, or proposals within a contract. Typically, this clause outlines the criteria and methodology to be used when comparing alternatives, such as price, quality, or performance metrics, ensuring that all parties understand how decisions will be made. Its core practical function is to promote transparency and objectivity in the selection process, reducing disputes and ensuring that choices are made based on agreed-upon standards.
Comparison Analysis. Each time that Service Provider makes a material change to the Materials, Equipment, Systems or Services, Service Provider shall perform a comparison analysis at a reasonable and mutually agreed level of detail to confirm the change shall not have an adverse impact on the costs, operations or environment of TxDOT or on the functionality, interoperability, performance, accuracy, speed, legality, responsiveness, quality or resource efficiency of the Services. In addition, at TxDOT's request, Service Provider shall perform a comparison at a reasonable and mutually agreed level of detail, between the amount of chargeable resources required to perform a representative sample of the Services being performed for TxDOT immediately prior to the change and immediately after the change. TxDOT shall not be required to pay for increased chargeable resources usage due to a change except to the extent that such change is requested or approved by TxDOT after notice from Service Provider of such increased chargeable resources usage.
View Source
Comparison Analysis. Each time that Supplier makes a Change to the Systems or Services, Supplier will perform a comparison analysis at a reasonable and mutually agreed level of detail to verify the Change will not have an adverse impact on the costs, operations or environment of Clearwire or on the functionality, interoperability, performance, accuracy, speed, legality, responsiveness, quality or resource efficiency of the Services. In addition, at Clearwire’s request, Supplier will perform a comparison at a reasonable and mutually agreed level of detail, between the amount of chargeable resources required to perform a representative sample of the Services being performed for Clearwire immediately prior to the Change and immediately after the Change. Clearwire will not be required to pay for increased chargeable resources usage due to a Change except to the extent that such Change is requested or approved by Clearwire after notice from Supplier of such increased chargeable resources usage.
View Source
Comparison Analysis. The parties to this Agreement will undertake during the term of the Agreement, a wages comparison between the classifications expressed within this Agreement and similar or comparable classifications in other New South Wales public sector agencies.
View Source
Comparison Analysis. How can SDM help in DCN
View Source
Comparison Analysis. With the introduction above, the feature of different fibers are compared in Table 7, as well as their preference in different DCN position. However, we should notice that it is hard to say which technology would have overwhelming advantage than others when considering all these features and various requirements in different scenarios. Table 7 depicts the performance comparison in terms of defined figure of merits and preference of DCN position. First, it is clear that FMF/MMF and MCF/MEF could provide better spectrum efficiency than others with negligible performance degradation. But fibers supporting mode division would need more complex signal processing technologies (e.g., MIMO) which would increase the implementation difficulty and cost. On the other hand, multi-core and multi-element fiber are more suitable for interconnection between aggregate/core switches due to their higher spectrum efficiency, while SMF and FMF/MMF are more suitable for interconnection closing server side (server-to-server and server-to-ToR) considering the cost efficiency (e.g., interfacing cost). Of course, with the technology advancement and increasing communication requirements, the cost of MCF/MEF would go down and an optical switch may directly interface with MCF which would make the SDM based fibers more popular. Table 7 Performance Comparison of different fiber technologies SMF FMF/MMF MCF MEF FM-MCF Spectrum efficiency low medium high high high Fiber Loss standard Can be low as SMF Can be low as SMF Can be low as SMF Higher than SMF Intra-Mode Nonlinearity no low Standard or high standard high Inter-Mode Nonlinearity no low to medium low no medium Mode Coupling/ Crosstalk no low to high, can be optimized medium no high Cost low as low as 1×SMF medium N×SMF medium DSP complexity low medium to high low to medium low high Server-to-Server (Intra-Rack) high high low low low Server-to-ToR high high medium low low ToR-to-Aggregate Switch low low high medium medium Inter-cluster low low high high high Inter-DC low low high high medium Interfaces supported by switches and connectors used to adapt the switch interface to the specific fibers (e.g., multi-core fiber) are directly related with the DCN design and its performance (e.g., cost efficiency, port density of switches). In this section, the potential interface technologies utilized by Venture and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ switch will be discussed.
View Source

Related to Comparison Analysis

  • Quantitative Analysis Quantitative analysts develop and apply financial models designed to enable equity portfolio managers and fundamental analysts to screen potential and current investments, assess relative risk and enhance performance relative to benchmarks and peers. To the extent that such services are to be provided with respect to any Account which is a registered investment company, Categories 3, 4 and 5 above shall be treated as “investment advisory services” for purposes of Section 5(b) of the Agreement.”

  • Risk Analysis The Custodian will provide the Fund with a Risk Analysis with respect to Securities Depositories operating in the countries listed in Appendix B. If the Custodian is unable to provide a Risk Analysis with respect to a particular Securities Depository, it will notify the Fund. If a new Securities Depository commences operation in one of the Appendix B countries, the Custodian will provide the Fund with a Risk Analysis in a reasonably practicable time after such Securities Depository becomes operational. If a new country is added to Appendix B, the Custodian will provide the Fund with a Risk Analysis with respect to each Securities Depository in that country within a reasonably practicable time after the addition of the country to Appendix B.

  • Sampling and Analysis The sampling and analysis of the coal delivered hereunder shall be performed by Buyer upon delivery of the coal to Buyer’s facility, and the results thereof shall be accepted and used as defining the quality and characteristics of the coal delivered under this Agreement and as the Payment Analysis. All analyses shall be made in Buyer’s laboratory at Buyer’s expense in accordance with ASTM standards where applicable, or industry-accepted standards in other cases. Samples for analyses shall be taken in accordance with ASTM standards or other methods mutually acceptable to both parties. Seller shall transmit its “as loaded” quality analysis to Buyer as soon as possible. Seller’s “as-loaded” quality shall be the Payment Analysis only when Buyer’s sampler and/or scales are inoperable, or if Buyer fails to obtain a sample upon unloading. Seller represents that it is familiar with Buyer’s sampling and analysis practices, and that it finds them to be acceptable. Buyer shall notify Seller in writing of any significant changes in Buyer’s sampling and analysis practices. Any such changes in Buyer’s sampling and analysis practices shall, except for ASTM or industry-accepted changes in practices, provide for no less accuracy than the sampling and analysis practices existing at the tune of the execution of this Agreement, unless the Parties otherwise mutually agree. Each sample taken by Buyer shall be divided into four (4) parts and put into airtight containers, properly labeled and sealed. One (1) part shall be used for analysis by Buyer. One (1) part shall be used by Buyer as a check sample, if Buyer in its sole judgment determines it is necessary. One (1) part shall be retained by Buyer until thirty (30) days after the sample is taken (“Disposal Date”), and shall be delivered to Seller for analysis if Seller so requests before the Disposal Date. One (1) part (the “Referee Sample”) shall be retained by Buyer until the Disposal Date. Seller shall be given copies of all analyses made by Buyer by the fifth (5th) business day of the month following the month of unloading. In addition, Buyer shall send Seller weekly analyses of coal unloaded at Buyer’s facilities. Seller, on reasonable notice to Buyer, shall have the right to have a representative present to observe the sampling and analyses performed by Buyer. Unless Seller requests an analysis of the Referee Sample before the Disposal Date, Buyer’s analysis shall be used to determine the quality of the coal delivered hereunder and shall be the Payment Analysis. The Monthly Weighted Averages of specifications referenced in §6.1 shall be based on the individual Shipment analyses. If any dispute arises with regard to the analysis of any sample before the Disposal Date for such sample, the Referee Sample retained by Buyer shall be submitted for analysis to an independent commercial testing laboratory (“Independent Lab”) mutually chosen by Buyer and Seller. For each coal quality specification in question, if the analysis of the Independent Lab differs by more than the applicable ASTM reproducibility standards, the Independent Lab results will govern, and the prior analysis shall be disregarded. All testing of the Referee Sample by the Independent Lab shall be at requestor’s expense unless the Independent Lab results differ from the original Payment Analysis for any specification by more than the applicable ASTM reproducibility standards as to that specification. In such case, the cost of the analysis made by the Independent Lab shall be borne by the party who provided the original Payment Analysis.

  • Independent Analysis Each Party hereby confirms that its decision to execute this Agreement has been based upon its independent assessment of documents and information available to it, as it has deemed appropriate.

  • Escrow Analysis If applicable, with respect to each Mortgage Loan, the Seller has within the last twelve months (unless such Mortgage was originated within such twelve month period) analyzed the required Escrow Payments for each Mortgage and adjusted the amount of such payments so that, assuming all required payments are timely made, any deficiency will be eliminated on or before the first anniversary of such analysis, or any overage will be refunded to the Mortgagor, in accordance with RESPA and any other applicable law;