COMPARISON RESULTS Sample Clauses
The COMPARISON RESULTS clause defines how the outcomes of comparing two or more items, data sets, or processes will be handled within the agreement. Typically, this clause outlines the criteria for comparison, the methods or standards to be used, and the responsibilities of each party in conducting or reviewing the comparison. For example, it may specify that test results from different vendors will be evaluated using a mutually agreed-upon benchmark. The core function of this clause is to ensure transparency and consistency in how comparisons are made, thereby reducing disputes and clarifying expectations regarding the evaluation process.
COMPARISON RESULTS. Appendix “A” displays the female predominant job classes grouped into levels according to job evaluation results. The chart also shows the male predominant job classes that have been evaluated as being of equal or comparable value (called “male comparators”) and which have been used to determine the pay equity gaps. The difference in compensation for each female predominant job where a pay equity gap was identified, was calculated using the 1989 job rates.
COMPARISON RESULTS. The pilot laboratory will collect the results of the participant laboratories. The two outcome results to be reported are:
1. Bilateral differences, with associated uncertainties at each measured temperature between each participating laboratory and the reference value Wref(t90) using equation (3): For comparison purposes, bilateral differences between laboratories 1 and 2, denoted by t90(1,2), will be calculated as follows: Wlab 2 (t90 ) Wlab1 (t90 ) (4) dW dt90 where: Wlab1(t90) is the W value reported by the laboratory 1 for temperature t90 using equation (1) Wlab2(t90) is the W value reported by the laboratory 2 for temperature t90 using equation (1) dW/dt90 is the first derivative of the W function for the IPRT as was obtained by the pilot in the characterization of the IPRT
2. Standard error will be calculated in each calibration point for each participant laboratory, using equations (2) and (3): U 2lab,t 90 U 2CV ,t 90 90 where: Elab,t
COMPARISON RESULTS. Bringing together the four different models, the two wind sources, and the modelling procedure (Sec.