Performance Analysis Sample Clauses

Performance Analysis. Customer may not publish any benchmarking results or other performance analysis of the SIEMonster Technology; Provided, however, that if there is a conflict between the terms of an applicable Open Source Software License and these license terms, restrictions, and conditions, the Open Source Software License controls to the extent of the conflict.

Performance Analysis. In this chapter, the performance analysis of B-GKAP models is presented. First, we start with the complexity analysis of the system. This analysis includes two components: communication complexity and computational complexity. Key computation and dynamic group operations of two B-GKAP models are also explained. Later on, our simulation envi- ronment is described. In the simulation environment section, hardware and software compo- nents of our testing environment are detailed. In the simulation cases and results section, the performance results of the system are presented. This section includes the effects of Hyper- ledger Fabric Orderer parameters, performance comparison of B-GKAP versus conventional implementation, and finally performance comparison of B-GKAP1 and B-GKAP2 models.

Performance Analysis. (a) Portfolio Yield (Finance Charge Collections during the Due Period divided by Principal Receivables in the Trust as of the first day of the Due Period) ___________%

Performance Analysis. ‌ We analyze the proposed solution in terms of the correctness, the security and the overall comparison with related solutions. For the security verification, we refer to [8,18–22] to evaluate session key security, mutual authentication, perfect forward security, and data integrity. Moreover, we also demonstrate that the proposed solution is safe when suffering replay attacks, impersonation attacks, privileged insider attacks, and stolen-verifier attacks.

Performance Analysis. Licensor may have provided a performance analysis of the Kaminario Software at your location (the “Kaminario Services Professional Analysis and Report”). Licensor has made reasonable commercial efforts to ensure the accuracy of the Kaminario Services Professional Analysis and Report, but you understand that the performance of the Kaminario Software may vary across a spectrum of factors, and that Licensor does not make any warranties regarding the content of Kaminario Services Professional Analysis and Report or the performance of the Kaminario Software. All of Licensor’s legal obligations, representations and warranties regarding the Kaminario Software and any implementation thereof are set forth solely in this Agreement and nothing in the Kaminario Services Professional Analysis and Report should be interpreted as providing any representations or warranties

Performance Analysis. The capacity of the 6 inch pump is a necessary redundancy for emergency scenarios in the collection system and a useful tool when emptying various tanks. DECISION POINT/RECOMMENDATION: Public Works Committee must decide whether or not to surplus this item to auction. DATE: September 25, 2017 FROM: ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, Wastewater Utility Project Manager SUBJECT: Agreement for Professional Engineering Services with J-U-B Engineers, Inc. DECISION POINT:

Performance Analysis. In the following, we show the performance of our proposed scheme. The performance evaluation of the proposed scheme mainly concerns the time complex- ity. For convenience, we suppose some notations are used to analyze the computational complexity as fol- lows: HUB VSAT (Xv , Yv Whv = (Xh)Rv = (Xv)Rh = gRh·Rv mod N ) Xh, Yh Xv = gRv mod N Yv = h(Xv, h(Sv ⊕ t)) mod N Xh = gRh mod N Sv = IDv−d mod N Yh = h(Xh, h(Sv ⊕ t)) mod N

Performance Analysis. + + ≈ + + + + In this section, we analyze the performance of our proposed Fig. 7. Comparison of computation cost. Fig. 8. Comparison of communication cost. We mainly focus on the authentication phase because the registration is executed for only once and the corresponding cost has little influence on the whole system. First, we consider the computation cost on server side. In [6], the computation cost on server side requires six scalar multiplication opera-‌ ≈ + ≈ + + ≈ scheme from three aspects which are computation cost, communication cost and on-chain cost. And we compare it with three related schemes [6], [12], and [24]. In Table III, we demonstrate the comparison of computation overhead to analyze the cost of these schemes on both SD and server. Additionally, the comparison of communication overhead is shown in Table IV. They are the theoretical analysis of the proposed scheme and the other three schemes, and they can point out the reasons for the differences among these schemes. ▇▇▇▇ et al. [6] built a consortium blockchain using Hyperledger Composer version V0.20.7, running on an x86_64 GNU/Linux system with 1 core and 2 GB RAM for executing smart contract operations. And we refer their experimental results, and the results are illustrated in Table V. We use the cryptographic library called MIRACL Core to test the execution time of cryptography operations under the Ubuntu ≈

Performance Analysis. ‌ In the sequel, we consider the case of the primal variable update xt only based on λt−1, and show that the resulting online solutions achieve both sub-linear dynamic regret RT and sub-linear aggregate violation VT . To this end, we first make the following three remarks: