Symmetry. A topology is symmetric when the network looks the same from every switch. Figure 3(a) and Figure 3(b) show different topologies: only the first one has the symmetric property. Although symmetric topologies may provide abundant communication paths between any two end nodes, taking advantage of this effect while providing deadlock free routing is usually a complex task, due to the overabundance of cycles. Switch degree. It is defined as the total number of input/output ports of a switch. The operating frequency of a switch and its area requirements are strongly related to this property: the higher the switch degree, the lower the switch maximum operating frequency, and the higher its area cost. Homogeneity. A topology is homogeneous if all of its switches have the same degree, that is, the same number of ports. Figure 3(a) and Figure 3(b) show two different topologies, where only the first one is homogeneous. In the NoC environment, nonhomogeneous topologies may present switches with different maximum operating frequency, since it strongly depends on the switch degree. This may force potentially faster switches to work at the speed of the slowest ones, or to use techniques to support switches with different operating frequencies in the same NoC. Although homogeneous topologies are more modular and in principle easier to implement, homogeneity is a desirable property but not an indispensable one. As an example, the reader should consider that End node Switch End node Switch
Symmetry. It is the intention of the parties for there -------- to be symmetry in the determination of benefit costs to be assumed by the Partnership (such as short and long term incentives), and costs retained by each other wireless employer (such as severance unrelated to the actions of the Partnership) whose employees transfer employment to the Partnership, including each employing entity other than the Partnership employing a Xxxx Atlantic Employee who transfers to the Partnership upon the Stage I or Stage II Closing. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Xxxx Atlantic shall assume any special benefit costs (including but not limited to severance) arising from the disposition of Conflicted Cellco Assets.
Symmetry. The presence or absence of symmetry is a characteristic of conceptualisations of DH first made explicit by Xxxx (2019a): can a politician emerge from a DH conflict with clean hands? Applied more generally to dirt, the symmetry division asks whether an agent can avoid dirt altogether when faced with a scenario where the ATC-justified right action entails dirt?16 This question is important in terms of ensuring the proper allocation of moral responsibility, the correct description of an agent’s phenomenological experience and moral character, and the right understanding of what is at stake for the actors making the decisions.
Symmetry. This property assumes that the multidimensional poverty index depends only on the various attributes j that the individuals have and not on their identity.
Symmetry. This point can be pressed further if we consider the other property of ordinary identity relations: symmetry. A further problem with the memory criterion if it is constitutive of personal identity is that memory, “being aware of the thoughts and actions of another person from the inside”, only works in one direction in time – backwards. In Xxxx’x example, the Officer remembers being the Boy, so he is personally identical with the Boy. In the same way, the General remembers being the Officer, so he is personally identical with the Officer. But the Boy does not remember be- ing the Officer. And the Officer does not remember being the General. Does that mean that the Boy is not personally identical with the Officer, and the Officer is not personally identical with the General? On a straightforward reading of the memory criterion, where the memory link backwards is the sole constitutive fact of personal identity, there can exist someone in the future who will be able to remember me and thus be personally identical with me. But I cannot remember being anyone in the future so I cannot be personally identical with that person. This again, cannot work for a relation which is supposed to be an identity relation. Now, if memory is taken to be merely symptomatic of an identity relation which transcends time, which is to say that the relation of personal identity is not entirely reduced to what I remember, but what I remember is just an effect of the underlying relation of identity, then symmetry is not a problem. In that case, a relation like “will be remembered by X”, that is to say a relation that is future- directed, would track the same relation of identity as the past-directed relation of “X remembers”. But the Traditional Reading is precisely that that is not how the memory cri- terion should be understood: it should not be understood as merely referring to a soul-like underlying identity. Instead, this reading of the memory criterion says that “X remembers” is wholly and solely what personal identity is constituted of. And if that is the case, “X remembers Y” and “Y will be remembered by X” are funda- mentally different kinds of relations. Not least because, when I say “X remembers Y”, X exists and Y has existed. That is a relation between things who have or have had concrete existence. But when when I say “Y will be remembered by X”, Y exists, but X does not and has never existed. And for all we can possibly know, X may never exist. The modality of the relati...
Symmetry. If the feasible set of solutions is symmetric, each party will get equal share of utility.
