Proposition 7 Clause Samples

Proposition 7. Based on the no-arbitrage hypothesis, the price of an American put should satisfy the following boundary conditions on the free boundary Sf (t): • P (Sf (t), t) = E − Sf (t), • ∂S (Sf (t), t) = −1.
Proposition 7. Assume that p does not divide hQ(ζp)+ and fix an element b of Bn— = A—n that projects to give a basis of the Rn—-module Bn. Then there exists a canonical exact triangle in Dperf(Rn) of the form Cn•,γ ⊕ Cn• θγ ⊕θb RΓc,´et (&Ln,Σ , Zp(1)) → A [—2] → (Cn•,γ
Proposition 7. Let π ∈ F+. Then, there exists ε1, ε2, ω ∈ E+(f) such that ([ ∣ ]) = − ([ ∣ ]) =
Proposition 7. Let V be a finite-dimensional real normed space, let D ⊆ [0, 1] be of positive measure, and let f ∈ L∞(D; V ) be mean zero and affinely homogeneous function. Then, for any ε > 0 and R ∈ (0, λ(D)), there exist a measurable set C ⊂ D, λ(C) = R, g ∈ L∞(C; V ) and a mod 0 automorphism T of C such that g ⩽ (SV + ε) f ∞ and f = g ◦ T − g .
Proposition 7. For each φ ∈ H^ such that φ is unramified, one has τ (φ) = 1. Suppose χ ∈ H^
Proposition 7. Assume n, r, k < ∞ and k ≤ r + 1. Then for each affine U ⊆ Xr,k,5, Xr,k,l (U )-module H1((Z/pnZ)×, & IGn,r,k,l (U )) is annihilated by Spn .
Proposition 7. Let R be a finite group, let S be a transitive permutation group of degree s ≥ 2, let D be a subgroup of Sym(d) containing Alt(d), let P be a large subgroup of the wreath product D \ S, and let G be a large subgroup of R \ P. Also, let K1 be the kernel of the action of P ≤ D \ S on a set of blocks of size d, and let A be the induced action of K1 on a fixed block ∆ for P. Assume that A ƒ= 1, that d ≥ 5, and set g(d, s) := max{1, √ }. Then
Proposition 7. 1.1. In Zp x, y we have the following equality of formal power series kě0 kě1

Related to Proposition 7

  • Suggestions and Feedback If you provide us with any suggestions, feedback or input (“Customer Input”) related to our Services, we (and our corporate group entities) will own all right, title and interest in and to the Customer Input, even if you have designated the Customer Input as confidential. We and our corporate group entities will be entitled to use the Customer Input without restriction. You assign to us all right, title and interest in and to the Customer Input and agree to provide us with any assistance we may require to document, perfect and maintain our rights in the Customer Input. For this purpose the word: “assign” is legal term which means legally transferring the benefit, such as you legally transferring the benefit of the Customer Input to us.

  • Cooperation with Inspector General Grantee understands its duty, pursuant to Section 20.055(5), Fla. Stat., to cooperate with Florida Housing’s Inspector General in any investigation, audit, inspection, review, or hearing. Grantee will comply with this duty and ensure that any contracts issued under this Agreement impose this requirement, in writing, on its subcontractors.

  • Cooperation with Investigations You agree to cooperate with us in the investigation of unusual transactions, poor quality transmissions, and resolution of customer claims, including by providing, upon request and without further cost, any originals or copies of items deposited through the Service in your possession and your records relating to such items and transmissions.

  • Preconstruction Conference Prior to, or concurrent with, the issuance of the Notice to Proceed with Construction, a conference will be convened for attendance by the Owner, Contractor, A/E and appropriate Subcontractors. The purpose of the conference is to establish a working understanding among the parties as to the Work, the operational conditions at the Project Site, and general administration of the Project. Topics include communications, schedules, procedures for handling Shop Drawings and other submittals, processing Applications for Payment, maintaining required records and all other matters of importance to the administration of the Project and effective communications between the project team members.

  • Constructability Review Prepare detailed interdisciplinary constructability review within Fourteen (14) days of receipt of the plans from the District that: 10.1.2.1.6.1 Ensures construction documents are well coordinated and reviewed for errors; 10.1.2.1.6.2 Identifies to the extent known, construction deficiencies and areas of concern; 10.1.2.1.6.3 Back-checks design drawings for inclusion of modifications; and 10.1.2.1.6.4 Provides the District with written confirmation that: 10.1.2.1.6.4.1 Requirements noted in the design documents prepared for the Project are consistent with and conform to the District's Project requirements and design standards. 10.1.2.1.6.4.2 Various components have been coordinated and are consistent with each other so as to minimize conflicts within or between components of the design documents.