Proposed Model Sample Clauses

Proposed Model. Given the exploratory nature of this study, a Poisson regression with counties as subunits and aggregate covariates was chosen to evaluate the influence between distance from primary distribution center and US county case counts in the 2018 Yuma outbreak. The basis for this model is below: !"#$(&) = )!! *! For counts yi in area i (in this case US counties), there is an independently identically Poisson distribution of cases, with the expectation in area i as ei. Multiplied by the qI as the area risk, we get: ," , ##. ~ !"#$()"1"), # = 1, . . . . , 4 In the literature review, potential confounding variables, associated with the exposure, which is a measure of supply chain configurations and thereby geographic distribution, and the outcome, county counts of E coli O157:H7. These covariates are described in the data dictionary, but are briefly described below in Table 3. Table 3: Variable Descriptions for Model Variable name in dataset Variable Description Reason for inclusion Distances Distance to Food Flow Center Exposure of interest Mar_y March Average Temperature in 2018 Environmental temperature at point of retail was highlighted as potential reason for increased E coli growth in produce supply chains. PropU15 County Proportion of population under age 15 in 2018 Severe illness among persons under 15 are more probable and thereby more likely to contribute to case counts PropOver60 County Proportion of population over 60 in 2018 Severe illness among persons over 60 are more probable and thereby more likely to contribute to case counts PropFemale County Proportion of population that is female sex in 2018 Dietary habits and risk among women who are pregnant may contribute to greater risk of illness form E coli Offset TotalPop County population in 2018 Used for offset in Poisson Regression The overall full model with covariates is below: ln(& ) = ln 78(9"); " ℓ" = <$ + <%>#$?@4A)$ + <&B@C_, + <'!C"EF15 + <(!C"EHI)C60 + <)!C"EL)M@N) + O%!C"EHI)C60 ∗ !C"EL)M@N) + O&!C"EF15 ∗ !C"EL)M@N) + Q%B@C_, ∗ >#$?@4A)$ To model this in SAS 9.4, the “offset” is carried over to model the loglinear association of the expected value. Because the model is explicitly evaluating the effect on this outbreak, the duration of the outbreak was used to estimate the person time exposed to contaminated lettuce from this specific public health event. The offset in this model is Person-Years calculated below: ℓ = R"?@N!"E ∗ S 84 W 365 With the offset, the model being derived from the data...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Proposed Model. In proposed scheme, we have introduced an improved version of Xxx’s scheme that not only provides the same level of security with anonymity and untracebility, at a lesser cost, but also protects the user from DoS and stolen verifier attacks. The proposed model comprises four phases, i.e. the registration phase, login and authentication phase, password update phase, and shared key update phase.
Sample 1
Proposed Model. In this section, we begin by presenting the state-of-the- art mechanism that are the main subjects of our research. In particular, we provide a brief description of the routing-by- agreement mechanism proposed in [45], and an introduc- tion to the self-attention layer [49] functionalities. Then, in Sections 3.3 and 3.4, we describe the similarities between the two mechanisms to provide the theoretical foundations behind the proposed model.
Sample 1
Proposed Model. This section presents an enhanced authentication protocol for EI-based vehicle to grid communication. Our scheme assumes the similar system architecture as G & S has illustrated in its protocol. In this system model, the three entities namely, user Ui with mobile device, a charging station CSj, and a utility service provider ESP, cooperate one another to enable the mutual authenticity between Ui and CSj. In this manner, the user may qualify for the stipulated recharging services. Our scheme comprises two phases; user registration andmutual authentication phase.
Sample 1
Proposed Model. The recommended model for estimating the change in frequency of human-induced landslides, based on a changing population, is: Δf = Fdev ⋅ Fpop ⋅ aL% ⋅ (ΔP – MΔP) or Δf = Fdev ⋅ Fpop ⋅ aL% ⋅ (1− M)⋅ ΔP where aL% was defined in section 6.3, Fdev, Fpd and M are the factors described in Tables 6.3.1, 6.4.1 and 6.5.1, and ∆P represents the change in population density, as a percentage4. The change in hazard level is directly proportional to the frequency change and can be classified qualitatively as indicated in Table 6.6.1. 4 Since the area of the region is considered unchanging, the change in population density (as a percentage) is equivalent to the change in population (as a percentage).
Sample 1
Proposed Model. In the second chapter we present a proposed model for leveraging CA technology in MOOCs as implemented in the context of the colMOOC project. First, in the subsection “Identified gaps to guide the conversational agent design approach”, we analytically discuss the three major pillars of the proposed design, namely: • The colMOOC agent to support productive forms of peer dialogue (cognitive dimension) • The colMOOC agent as domain-independent teachers’ open tool (socio-cultural dimension), and • The colMOOC agent as an interoperable tool to be integrated in MOOCs platforms (technological dimension). Then, we move on to discuss specific aspects of the proposed model such as: • The agent intervention strategies in students’ chat activities • The agent software key components: the Editor and the Player • The agent domain configuration by the teacher
Sample 1
Proposed Model. It is clear from the previous section that VSO and SVO words ordering is important and should be used carefully. This proposal focuses on the agreement requirements based on VSO or SVO pattern is used. The subsequent examples in tables 3 through 6 show different agreement requirements between the verb and the subject depending on whether VSO or SVO words ordering are used. The selection of using VSO or SVO related to the context where we use SVO whenever the subject is our focus.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Proposed Model 
Sample 1

Related to Proposed Model

  • PROPOSED MOBILITY PROGRAMME The proposed mobility programme includes the indicative start and end months of the agreed study programme that the student will carry out abroad. The Learning Agreement must include all the educational components to be carried out by the student at the receiving institution (in table A) and it must contain as well the group of educational components that will be replaced in his/her degree by the sending institution (in table B) upon successful completion of the study programme abroad. Additional rows can be added as needed to tables A and B. Additional columns can also be added, for example, to specify the study cycle-level of the educational component. The presentation of this document may also be adapted by the institutions according to their specific needs. However, in every case, the two tables A and B must be kept separated, i.e. they cannot be merged. The objective is to make clear that there needs to be no one to one correspondence between the courses followed abroad and the ones replaced at the sending institutions. The aim is rather that a group of learning outcomes achieved abroad replaces a group of learning outcomes at the sending institution, without having a one to one correspondence between particular modules or courses. A normal academic year of full-time study is normally made up of educational components totalling 60 ECTS* credits. It is recommended that for mobility periods shorter than a full academic year, the educational components selected should equate to a roughly proportionate number of credits. In case the student follows additional educational components beyond those required for his/her degree programme, these additional credits must also be listed in the study programme outlined in table A. When mobility windows are embedded in the curriculum, it will be enough to fill in table B with a single line as described below: Component code (if any) Component title (as indicated in the course catalogue) at the sending institution Semester [autumn / spring] [or term] Number of ECTS* credits Mobility window … Total: 30 Otherwise, the group of components will be included in Table B as follows: Component code (if any) Component title (as indicated in the course catalogue) at the sending institution Semester [autumn / spring] [or term] Number of ECTS* credits Course x … 10 Module y … 10 Laboratory work … 10 Total: 30 The sending institution must fully recognise the number of ECTS* credits contained in table A if there are no changes to the study programme abroad and the student successfully completes it. Any exception to this rule should be clearly stated in an annex of the Learning Agreement and agreed by all parties. Example of justification for non-recognition: the student has already accumulated the number of credits required for his/her degree and does not need some of the credits gained abroad. Since the recognition will be granted to a group of components and it does not need to be based on a one to one correspondence between single educational components, the sending institution must foresee which provisions will apply if the student does not successfully complete some of the educational components from his study programme abroad. A web link towards these provisions should be provided in the Learning Agreement. The student will commit to reach a certain level of language competence in the main language of instruction by the start of the study period. The level of the student will be assessed after his/her selection with the Erasmus+ online assessment tool when available (the results will be sent to the sending institution) or else by any other mean to be decided by the sending institution. A recommended level has been agreed between the sending and receiving institutions in the inter-institutional agreement. In case the student would not already have this level when he/she signs the Learning Agreement, he/she commits to reach it with the support to be provided by the sending or receiving institution (either with courses that can be funded by the organisational support grant or with the Erasmus+ online tutored courses). All parties must sign the document; however, it is not compulsory to circulate papers with original signatures, scanned copies of signatures or digital signatures may be accepted, depending on the national legislation. * In countries where the "ECTS" system it is not in place, in particular for institutions located in partner countries not participating in the Bologna process, "ECTS" needs to be replaced in all tables by the name of the equivalent system that is used and a weblink to an explanation to the system should be added. CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL LEARNING AGREEMENT The section to be completed during the mobility is needed only if changes have to be introduced into the original Learning Agreement. In that case, the section to be completed before the mobility should be kept unchanged and changes should be described in this section. Changes to the mobility study programme should be exceptional, as the three parties have already agreed on a group of educational components that will be taken abroad, in the light of the course catalogue that the receiving institution has committed to publish well in advance of the mobility periods and to update regularly as ECHE holder. However, introducing changes might be unavoidable due to, for example, timetable conflicts. Other reasons for a change can be the request for an extension of the duration of the mobility programme abroad. Such a request can be made by the student at the latest one month before the foreseen end date. These changes to the mobility study programme should be agreed by all parties within four to seven weeks (after the start of each semester). Any party can request changes within the first two to five-week period after regular classes/educational components have started for a given semester. The exact deadline has to be decided by the institutions. The shorter the planned mobility period, the shorter should be the window for changes. All these changes have to be agreed by the three parties within a two-week period following the request. In case of changes due to an extension of the duration of the mobility period, changes should be made as timely as possible as well. Changes to the study programme abroad should be listed in table C and, once they are agreed by all parties, the sending institution commits to fully recognise the number of ECTS credits as presented in table C. Any exception to this rule should be documented in an annex of the Learning Agreement and agreed by all parties. Only if the changes described in table C affect the group of educational components in the student's degree (table B) that will be replaced at the sending institution upon successful completion of the study programme abroad, a revised version should be inserted and labelled as "Table D: Revised group of educational components in the student's degree that will be replaced at sending institution". Additional rows and columns can be added as needed to tables C and D. All parties must confirm that the proposed amendments to the Learning Agreement are approved. For this specific section, original or scanned signatures are not mandatory and an approval by email may be enough. The procedure has to be decided by the sending institution, depending on the national legislation.

  • Proposed Services A description of the Contractor’s proposed services to accomplish the specified work requirements, including dates of completion.

  • Purchase Order Pricing/Product Deviation If a deviation of pricing/product on a Purchase Order or contract modification occurs between the Vendor and the TIPS Member, TIPS must be notified within five (5) business days of receipt of change order. Termination for Convenience of TIPS Agreement Only TIPS reserves the right to terminate this agreement for cause or no cause for convenience with a thirty (30) days prior written notice. Termination for convenience is conditionally required under Federal Regulations 2 CFR part 200 if the customer is using federal funds for the procurement. All purchase orders presented to the Vendor, but not fulfilled by the Vendor, by a TIPS Member prior to the actual termination of this agreement shall be honored at the option of the TIPS Member. The awarded Vendor may terminate the agreement with ninety (90) days prior written notice to TIPS 0000 XX Xxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxx 00000. The vendor will be paid for goods and services delivered prior to the termination provided that the goods and services were delivered in accordance with the terms and conditions of the terminated agreement. This termination clause does not affect the sales agreements executed by the Vendor and the TIPS Member customer pursuant to this agreement. TIPS Members may negotiate a termination for convenience clause that meets the needs of the transaction based on applicable factors, such as funding sources or other needs. TIPS Member Purchasing Procedures Usually, purchase orders or their equal are issued by participating TIPS Member to the awarded vendor and should indicate on the order that the purchase is per the applicable TIPS Agreement Number. Orders are typically emailed to TIPS at xxxxxx@xxxx-xxx.xxx. • Awarded Vendor delivers goods/services directly to the participating member. • Awarded Vendor invoices the participating TIPS Member directly. • Awarded Vendor receives payment directly from the participating member. • Fees are due to TIPS upon payment by the Member to the Vendor. Vendor agrees to pay the participation fee to TIPS for all Agreement sales upon receipt of payment including partial payment, from the Member Entity or as otherwise agreed by TIPS in writing and signed by an authorized signatory of TIPS.

  • Proposal Proposal means any information supplied by or on behalf of the insured, deemed to be a completed proposal form and medical questionnaire and other relevant information that the insurer may require.

  • Flexible Work Schedule A flexible work schedule is any schedule that is not a regular, alternate, 9/80, or 4/10 work schedule and where the employee is not scheduled to work more than 40 hours in the "workweek" as defined in Subsections F. and H., below.

  • Innovative/Flexible Scheduling Where the Hospital and the Union agree, arrangements regarding Innovative Scheduling/Flexible Scheduling may be entered into between the parties on a local level. The model agreement with respect to such scheduling arrangements is set out below: MODEL AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO INNOVATIVE SCHEDULING/FLEXIBLE SCHEDULING MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT Between: The Hospital - And: The Ontario Public Service Employees Union (and its Local ) This Model Agreement shall be part of the Collective Agreement between the parties herein, and shall apply to the employees described in Article 1 of the Model Agreement.

  • Loop Provisioning Involving IDLC 2.16.1 Where TWTC has requested an Unbundled Loop and AT&T uses IDLC systems to provide the local service to the customer and AT&T has a suitable alternate facility available, AT&T will make such alternative facilities available to TWTC. If a suitable alternative facility is not available, then to the extent it is technically feasible, AT&T will implement one of the following alternative arrangements for TWTC (e.g., hairpinning):

  • Recovery Schedule If the initial schedule or any current updates fail to reflect the Work’s actual plan or method of operation, or a contractual milestone date is more than fifteen (15) days behind, Owner may require that a recovery schedule for completion of the remaining Work be submitted. The Recovery Schedule must be submitted within seven (7) calendar days of Owner’s request. The Recovery Schedule shall describe in detail Construction Contractor’s plan to complete the remaining Work by the required Contract milestone date. The Recovery Schedule submitted shall meet the same requirements as the original Construction Schedule. The narrative submitted with the Recovery Schedule should describe in detail all changes that have been made to meet the Contract milestone dates.

  • Pricing The Contractor will not exceed the pricing set forth in the Contract documents.

  • Bidding and Proposal Phase 1.5.1 In conjunction with the development of the Guaranteed Maximum Price and at other times as appropriate to the Project, the Architect/Engineer shall assist the Owner and Construction Manager by receiving and recording requests for Bid and Request for Proposal (“RFP”) Documents, receiving and resolving questions about Bid and RFP Documents; preparing addenda, issuing addenda, and accounting for addenda issued; attending pre-bid and pre-proposal conferences and HUB meetings; evaluating bids and proposals; and assisting in preparing and awarding multiple contracts for construction. Architect/Engineer shall answer inquiries from bidders and proposers at Owner’s request, and shall prepare and issue any necessary addenda to the bidding or proposal documents.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.