Nonlinear Poisson Maximum Likelihood Clause Samples

Nonlinear Poisson Maximum Likelihood. Another mathematical framework common to image processing applications is a Poisson-based model, in which the data is assumed to be a realization of a Poisson random variable. Tomographic imaging is a classic example of this model. The observed data is based on counts, e.g. photon counts, and can be represented as b = Υ[Ax true] + ε , (1.5) where x true contains voxel values for the true 3D volume, A ∈ Rm×n is a discrete representation of a ray trace operation, Υ[·] models a nonlinear transmission tomography process, and ε is additive noise (assumed to have a Poisson distribution). Given the observed data and information regarding the tomographic process, the goal is to compute an approximation of x true that likely produced the observed data b. To solve this problem, the Pois- son distribution is used to formulate the likelihood function, p(b, x), and standard optimization methods are implemented to maximize the likelihood function. That is, we consider the following problem:

Related to Nonlinear Poisson Maximum Likelihood

  • Unbundled Channelization (Multiplexing) 5.7.1 To the extent NewPhone is purchasing DS1 or DS3 or STS-1 Dedicated Transport pursuant to this Agreement, Unbundled Channelization (UC) provides the optional multiplexing capability that will allow a DS1 (1.544 Mbps) or DS3 (44.736 Mbps) or STS-1 (51.84 Mbps) Network Elements to be multiplexed or channelized at a BellSouth central office. Channelization can be accomplished through the use of a multiplexer or a digital cross-connect system at the discretion of BellSouth. Once UC has been installed, NewPhone may request channel activation on a channelized facility and BellSouth shall connect the requested facilities via COCIs. The COCI must be compatible with the lower capacity facility and ordered with the lower capacity facility. This service is available as defined in NECA 4. 5.7.2 BellSouth shall make available the following channelization systems and interfaces: 5.7.2.1 DS1 Channelization System: channelizes a DS1 signal into a maximum of twenty- four (24)

  • Geometric visibility The visibility of the illuminating surface, including its visibility in areas which do not appear to be illuminated in the direction of observation considered, shall be ensured within a divergent space defined by generating lines based on the perimeter of the illuminating surface and forming an angle of not less than 5° with the axis of reference of the headlamp.

  • Bilingual Differential When formally assigned in the employee’s position description, an employee assigned to interpret to or from another language to English will receive a differential of five percent (5%) of base pay.

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is a NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASPP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram, , the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”), and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by LEA pursuant to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. ▇▇▇ shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by ▇▇▇.

  • Aggravating and Mitigating Factors The penalties in this matter were determined in consideration of all relevant circumstances, including statutory factors as described in CARB’s Enforcement Policy. CARB considered whether the violator came into compliance quickly and cooperated with the investigation; the extent of harm to public health, safety and welfare; nature and persistence of the violation, including the magnitude of the excess emissions; compliance history; preventative efforts taken; innovative nature and the magnitude of the effort required to comply, and the accuracy, reproducibility, and repeatability of the available test methods; efforts to attain, or provide for, compliance prior to violation; action taken to mitigate the violation; financial burden to the violator; and voluntary disclosure. The penalties are set at levels sufficient to deter violations, to remove any economic benefit or unfair advantage from noncompliance, to obtain swift compliance, and the potential costs, risks, and uncertainty associated with litigation. Penalties in future cases might be smaller or larger depending on the unique circumstances of the case.