Examples I Sample Clauses

The "Examples I" clause serves to illustrate or clarify the application of certain terms or provisions within an agreement by providing specific instances or scenarios. Typically, this clause lists hypothetical or real-world examples that demonstrate how a particular rule, obligation, or definition should be interpreted in practice. By including such examples, the clause helps prevent ambiguity and ensures that all parties have a shared understanding of how the contract's terms are intended to function in various situations.
Examples I. The following examples illustrate the correspondence established in Sec- tion 3.1. They show in particular that very often (Examples 1, 2, and 3), but not always (Examples 6 and 7 in Appendix B), the direct connection between entanglement and positive intrinsic information holds with respect to the standard bases (i.e., the bases physicists use by commodity and intu- ition).
Examples I. The following examples illustrate the correspondence established in Section 3.1. They show in particular that very often (Examples 1, 2, and 3), but not always (Example 4), the direct connection between entanglement and positive intrinsic information holds with respect to the standard bases (i.e., the bases physicists use by commodity and intuition). Example 1 was already analyzed in [15]. The examples of this section will be discussed further in Section 3.5 under the aspect of the existence of key-agreement protocols in the classical and quantum regimes. Example 1. Let us consider the so-called 4-state protocol of [3]. The analysis of the 6-state protocol [1] is analogous and leads to similar results. We compare the is [11] √ √ √ √ Ψ = F/2 |0, 0)⊗ ξ00 + D/2 |0, 1)⊗ ξ01 + D/2 |1, 0)⊗ ξ10 + F/2 |1, 1)⊗ ξ11 , where D (the disturbance)is the probability that X ƒ= Y holds if X and Y are the classical random variables of ▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇, respectively, where F = 1 − D (the fidelity ), and where the ξij satisfy (ξ00|ξ11) = (ξ01|ξ10) = 1− 2D and (ξii|ξij) = 0 for all i ƒ= j. Then the state ρAB is (in the basis {| 00 ), | 01 ), | 10 ), | 11 )}) 1  D 0 0 −D(1 − 2D)  ρAB =  0 1 − D −(1 − D)(1 − 2D) 0  2  0 −(1 − D)(1 − 2D) 1 − D 0  −D(1 − 2D) 0 0 D and its partial transpose 1  D 0 0 −(1 − D)(1 − 2D)  = AB 2  0 1 − D −D(1 − 2D) 0  0 −D(1 − 2D) 1 − D 0  −(1 − D)(1 − 2D) 0 0 D has the eigenvalues (1/2)(D (1 D)(1 2D)) and (1/2)((1 D) D(1 2D)), which are all non-negative (i.e., ρAB is separable) if D ≥ 1 − √2 . (4) From the classical viewpoint, the corresponding distributions (arising from measuring the above quantum system in the standard bases) are as follows. First, X and Y are both symmetric bits with Prob [X = Y ] = D. Eve’s random variable Z = [Z1, Z2] is composed of 2 bits Z1 and Z2, where Z1 = X Y , i.e., Z1 tells Eve whether ▇▇▇ received the qubit disturbed (Z1 = 1) or not (Z1 = 0) (this is a consequence of the fact that the ξii and ξij (i =ƒ j)states generate orthogonal sub- spaces), and where the probability that Eve’s seco√nd bit indicates the correct √value of Bob’s bit is Prob[Z2 = Y ] = δ = (1 + 1 − (ξ00|ξ11)2)/2 = 1/2 +
Examples I. The following examples illustrate the correspondence established in Section 3.1. They show in particular that very often (Examples 1, 2, and 3), but not always (Example 4), the direct connection between entanglement and positive intrinsic information holds with respect to the standard bases (i.e., the bases physicists use by commodity and intuition). Example 1 was already analyzed in [15]. The is [11]
Examples I. The following examples illustrate the correspondence established in Sec- tion 3.1. They show in particular that very often (Examples 1, 2, and 3), but not always (Examples 6 and 7 in Appendix B), the direct connection between entanglement and positive intrinsic information holds with respect to the standard bases (i.e., the bases physicists use by commodity and intu- ition). Example 1. Let us consider the so-called 4-state protocol of [3]. The analy- sis of the 6-state protocol [1] is analogous and leads to similar results [15]. We compare the possibility of quantum and classical key agreement given the quantum state and the corresponding classical distribution, respectively, arising from this protocol. The conclusion is, under the assumption of in- coherent eavesdropping, that key agreement in one setting is possible if and only if this is true also for the other. ƒ

Related to Examples I

  • Supplier Diversity Seller shall comply with ▇▇▇▇▇’s Supplier Diversity Program in accordance with Appendix V.

  • Dependencies HP’s ability to deliver services will depend on Customer’s reasonable and timely cooperation and the accuracy and completeness of any information from Customer needed to deliver the services.

  • Performance Indicators The HSP’s delivery of the Services will be measured by the following Indicators, Targets and where applicable Performance Standards. In the following table: INDICATOR CATEGORY INDICATOR P=Performance Indicator E=Explanatory Indicator M=Monitoring Indicator 2022/23 Organizational Health and Financial Indicators Debt Service Coverage Ratio (P) 1 ≥1 Total Margin (P) 0 ≥0 Coordination and Access Indicators Percent Resident Days – Long Stay (E) n/a n/a Wait Time from Home and Community Care Support Services (HCCSS) Determination of Eligibility to LTC Home Response (M) n/a n/a Long-Term Care Home Refusal Rate (E) n/a n/a Quality and Resident Safety Indicators Percentage of Residents Who Fell in the Last 30 days (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents Whose Pressure Ulcer Worsened (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents on Antipsychotics Without a Diagnosis of Psychosis (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents in Daily Physical Restraints (M) n/a n/a

  • Year 2000 Compatibility Take all actions necessary to assure the Borrower's computer based systems are able to operate and effectively process data on and after January 1, 2000. At the request of the Lender, the Borrower shall provide the Lender with assurance acceptable to the Lender that Borrower's computer systems have Year 2000 compatibility.

  • Screening The Health Plan must work with contracted providers to conduct interperiodic EPSDT screens on RIte Care and all ACA Adult Expansion Population members under age 21 (i.e. 19 and 20-year old under this Agreement) to identify health and developmental problems in conformance with ATTACHMENT ED to this Agreement. Additional screens should be provided as Medically Necessary. At a minimum, these screens must include: • A comprehensive health and developmental history, including health education, nutrition assessment, immunization history, and developmental assessment • Immunizations according to the Rhode Island EPSDT Periodicity Schedule • An unclothed physical examination • Laboratory tests including lead, TB, and newborn screenings as medically indicated • Vision testing • Hearing testing • Dental screening oral examination by PCP as part of a comprehensive examination required before age one (1) • All other medically indicated screening services • And provide EOHHS with a list of established CPT/HCPC codes used to identify all billable services included in the EPSDT schedule.