Quantitative evaluation Sample Clauses

Quantitative evaluation. The Matlab based tool uses log-files generated by Hermes for calculation of quantita- tive measures for specified key performance indicators (i.e. journey time, resilience, punctuality, energy consumption, resource usage ). The result can also be visualized in form of a number of diagrams. See examples below and in the document D4.3 from the ON-TIME project.
View Source
Quantitative evaluation. To quantitatively evaluate the performance of the system, we simulated contract gen- eration with varying (i) modes of operation (TCP/TLS/HTTP/HTTPS), (ii) number of facts per contract, and (iii) certificate chain lengths of both peers. We quantitatively evaluate the (a) total duration of the handshake, (b) the number of bytes transferred, as well as (c) the size of the generated contract in its default JSON representation. We employ a TCP proxy to investigate the impact of varying network latency on the proto- col’s performance and measure the amount of data transferred. Overhead for TLS and HTTP are included in the results. We split the evaluation into two orthogonal parameter combinations to facilitate visualization and discussion, which we show in Table 1. Contract Size & Communication Overhead. In Fig. 3, we show how the number of facts in one contract influences contract bytes and communication overhead per fact, split by handshake mode. A per-fact plot brings better comparability to other approaches than per-contract, as contracts are a concept that is specific to our approach. Thus, metrics are plotted on a per-fact (i.e., per-resource) basis. The total contract size and communication overhead per handshake increase linearly with the number of facts, as fact data is of constant size, consisting of a RID and a checksum. Thus, if m models one of the per-contract metrics, this gives m(n) = sn + c, where s is the slope of the curve, i.e., the bytes by which the metric increases if one fact is added per contract, n is the number of facts per contract, and c is the constant overhead which is not influenced by the number of facts. Then, we can model the per-fact metric Table 1. Overview of the evaluated parameter combinations. 1 TCP, TLS, HTTP, HTTPS 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 0 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 20 2 TCP, TLS, HTTP, HTTPS 10 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 1 50 Contract Bytes HTTP TCP HTTPS TCP+TLS Theoretical limit: 127 Contract B/fact 10K Bytes per fact 1K 100 1 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Facts per contract
View Source

Related to Quantitative evaluation

  • Performance Evaluations Employee performance shall be evaluated and communicated on a yearly basis as required under County policy. Performance evaluations are used to demonstrate to employees that they are valued; record how an employee’s performance meet the requirements of the job; create a job history record; identify employee strengths and areas for enhancement; assist the employee and supervisor in an effort to attain the highest level of performance; and reinforce performance standards. Every effort will be made to include substantiated information within an employee’s performance evaluation. Non-recurring discipline history which is more than two (2) years old will not be referenced in performance evaluations. The County shall ensure employee performance evaluations are conducted in accordance with County and departmental policy. Performance evaluations and disciplinary matters shall only be conducted by County employees. When an employee who does not agree with the overall rating he/she receives on his/her written performance evaluation, he/she shall discuss and attempt to resolve the differences with his/her immediate supervisor. If discussion with his/her immediate supervisor does not result in resolution of the differences, the employee may file a written request to meet with the next level of management. Said request shall state the unresolved issues and the specific changes in the written performance evaluation the employee is seeking. The appropriate manager shall meet with the employee to discuss the unresolved issues. If the issues are not resolved to the employee’s satisfaction following discussion with the appropriate manager, the employee may within thirty (30) working days file a written request for a meeting with the department head. Within fourteen (14) working days of receipt of a written request stating the unresolved issues and the desired changes in the written performance evaluation, the department head shall meet with the employee to discuss the issues. Within ten (10) working days of said meeting, the department head shall respond in writing to the employee. The decision of the Department Head shall be final and not subject to the grievance procedure. An employee may submit a written response to his/her evaluation that shall be placed in his/her personnel file.

  • Performance Evaluation The Department may conduct a performance evaluation of Contractor’s Services, including Contractor’s Subcontractors. Results of any evaluation may be made available to Contractor upon request.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and ▇▇▇▇ them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • 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.”

  • 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.