alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**     I, Gary L. Dreher, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AMDL, Inc. for the period endedJune 30, 2006;     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented inthis quarterly report;     4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the small business issuer and have:     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisquarterly report based on such evaluation; and     c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s fourth fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, thesmall business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’sauditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: August 14, 2006/s/ Gary L. Dreher
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FORM
10-QSB FOR USA INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL, INC. FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                             690
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     690
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              567
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            13
<OTHER-SE>                                         110
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       690
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,100)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (16,900)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (16,900)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
#### Hiatt *v.*Pettijohn.

APPEAL from the Hamilton, Circuit Court.

*y. W. Evans,*for appellant.

*G. H. Voss*and *T. y. Kane,*for appellee.

Downey, J.

The transcript in this case is not authenticated by the seal of the circuit court. 2 G. & H. 273, sec. 558; *Hinton*v. *Brown,*1 Blackf. 429.

The appeal is dismissed, with costs.
**EXHIBIT 15**

To the Board of Directorsand Shareholder ofAllstate Life Insurance Company of New York:

Wehave made a review, in accordance with the standards of the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financialinformation of Allstate Life Insurance Company of New York for the three-monthand six-month periods ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, as indicated in our reportdated August 4, 2006; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed noopinion on that information.

Weare aware that our report referred to above, which is included in yourQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, isincorporated by reference in the following Registration Statements:

| **Form S-3 Registration Statement Nos.** | ** ** | **Form  N-4 Registration Statement Nos.** |
|------------------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------------------|
| 333-58512                                |       | 033-65381                                 |
| 333-100029                               |       | 333-68344                                 |
|                                     |       | 333-81970                                 |
|                                     |       | 333-94785                                 |

 

Wealso are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) underthe Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the RegistrationStatement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared orcertified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

/s/ Deloitte& Touche LLP

Chicago, IllinoisAugust 4, 2006

 

E-2

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than December 29, 2014.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

                    1.                     *The JCR 2015 LFG Trust and Joshua C. Rowland, Kansas City, Missouri, individually and as co-trustee, of the JCR 2015 LFG Trust,*                     Kansas City, Missouri, to acquire voting shares of Lead Financial Group, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Lead Bank, both in Garden City, Missouri.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 8, 2014.

Michael J. Lewandowski,

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2014-29042 Filed 12-10-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7983

ERIC MATTHEW CUMMINGS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.

(CA-95-425)

Submitted: March 21, 1995 Decided: April 12, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Matthew Cummings, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cummings

v. Angelone, No. CA-95-425 (E.D. Va. Nov. 14, 1995). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
device add env AnalyzerFlipper1
device add env MonoGuide
device add alias EFflip AnalyzerFlipper1
device add alias EIguide MonoGuide
IFOpen He3nmr
IFTalk He3nmr "He3PolEnabled()"
___________

United States Department of Com

National Institute of Standards and Technolo

Certificate of Metrological Traceability For: 

Minnesota 

This laboratory has demonstrated evidence of an unbroken chain of metrological traceability of its standards to the international system of units (SI), maintains a documented calibration program, documented measurement uncertainties, uses documented measurement procedures, successfully completed training and proficiency tests, submitted a quality management system, and has demonstrated suitable measurement assurance for the Scope listed on this certificate. 

The Office of Weights and Measures Program assesses laboratories to NIST Handbook 143 - Program Handbook for State Weights and Measures Laboratories and ISO/IEC 17025:2017. 

Scope 

Mass Echelon I Mass Echelon III Volume Gravimetric, I 

10 kg 30 kg to 1 mg 20 L to 10 mL

1 kg to 1 mg 3000 lb to 200 lb 100 gal to 0.25 gal

Mass Echelon II 100 lb to 0.001 lb 12 fl oz

500 kg

200 kg

100 kg

4 oz to 0.03125 oz

Weight Carts

5000 lb to 2000 lb

Volume Transfer and Scale Plate, II 1500 gal to 5 gal

5 kg to 1 mg

2500 lb1000 lb

Wheel Load Weighers

12 000 lb to 4000 lb

Volume Transfer and Scale Plate, II 

LPG 

500 lb Railroad Test Cars/Carts 200 gal to 25 gal

250 lb 110 000 lb to 80 000 lb

50 lb to 0.001 lb 10 000 lb to 8000 lb

Katrice LippNIST Office Effective Date

(Rev.: September 2021)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7428

RICHARD GRIFFIN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-02-677) Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 17, 2004 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard Griffin, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Richard Griffin seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Griffin has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This Amendment No. 2 to Employment Agreement (“Amendment”) is made as of the 18th day of July, 2008, by and between RUBY TUESDAY, INC., a Georgia corporation (the “Company”) and SAMUEL E. BEALL, III, a resident of the State of Tennessee (“Executive”).

WHEREAS, the Company and Executive are parties to that certain Employment Agreement dated of as June 19, 1999, as amended by Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement dated January 9, 2003 (collectively, the “Agreement”); and

WHEREAS, Executive and the Company desire to amend the Agreement as hereinafter set forth; and

WHEREAS, capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meanings attributed to such terms in the Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree that the Agreement shall be amended, effective as of July 18, 2008, as follows:

1.     Section 3.2 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted therefor:

|   | “**3.2** | **Incentive Compensation.** |
|--------|---------------|-----------------------------|

 

(a)       The Executive shall be entitled to an annual bonus opportunity pursuant to the terms of the Ruby Tuesday, Inc. 2006 Executive Incentive Compensation Plan, based upon performance criteria approved by the Board of Directors of the Company, or appropriate committee thereof, with a target bonus equal to one hundred percent (100%) of Base Salary and a maximum bonus equal to one hundred and seventy-five percent (175%) of Base Salary. Any annual bonuses earned shall be paid as soon as practicable following the close of the applicable fiscal year but in no event later than the later of the 15th day of the third month following such fiscal year or the 15th day of the third month following the end of the calendar year containing the last day of such fiscal year; provided, further, however,that payment of all or any portion of an annual bonus payment may be deferred by the Executive pursuant to any deferred compensation plan in effect to the extent such deferral is effected in compliance with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

(b)       The Executive shall also be entitled to participate in such long-term incentive compensation programs as may be developed from time to time for the senior management of the Company, including grants of any awards under the Company’s equity incentive plans.  Such compensation shall be awarded to Executive according to the same criteria pursuant to which such compensation is then being awarded to other senior executives of the Company.  The target values of annual equity incentive award(s), determined as of the grant date, to be awarded to the Executive during the Term are set forth on Appendix 3.2(b) attached hereto.  The type and number of any annual award(s) shall be determined by the Compensation and Stock Option Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company; provided, however, that the equity incentive award(s) may be 

 

----
An Infrastructure-Free Localization 

System for Firefighters

PI: Anthony Rowe, Bruno Sinopoli; Students: Niranjini Rajagopal, Anh Luong Industrial partner 

Electrical and Computer Engineering 

Contact : agr@ece.cmu.edu , niranjir@andrew.cmu.edu

Problem Challenges 

Our Approach

Where	are	the	

firefighters?

No	prior	information	or	

infrastructure

Poor	visibility No	additional	effort

Restricted	perimeter Orientation	critical Power,	accuracy

Expected Outcomes

• Wearable hardware module (processor 

+ IMU + UWB + LoRa + firmware 

for inter-node ranging & 

communication

• External ingress beacon

• Commander console with a laptop + 

LoRa radio receiver

• Solver for mobile network localization 

• Test dataset 

• Evaluation report, video 

documentation

Enhancements

Digital search rope

Inferring pathways in buildings

Likely a hallway

Indoor Localization Experience

David	Lawrence	Convention	Center,	

Pittsburgh

1.5M	ft2 è 350	beacons

David	Lawrence	Convention	Center,	

Pittsburgh

1.5M	ft2 è 350	beacons

Step 1: Deploy beacons at building entrance

Step 2: Attach tag to firefighters air pack

Step 3: Utilize sensor data to localize 

firefighters

Ingress	Beacons

(LoRa,	UWB,	GPS)

Entrance

Firefigher with	Wearable	Tag

(LoRa,	UWB,	IMU)

Buddies

IMU	trace

UWB	ranging

GPS	location

Safety	chief	console

(LoRa)

L	2

L	3

L	1

Main components of system

LoRa communication

Challenge : In reality, IMUs drift over time and inter-device connectivity is sparse

Insight : Combine IMU data with inter-device ranging, leverage the buddy system, apply theory 

from SLAM, network localization to solve the framed mobile sensor network localization problem 

t0

t3

t1

t4

t2

t0

t3

t1

t4

t5

t6

t2

t3

t4

t5

t6

Resulting mobile sensor network localization problem under our framework

t3
EXHIBIT
32.2





TELVUE
CORPORATION





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
sec. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of TelVue Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Fell, Controller
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Date: 08/14/09
              
              /s/ John FellJohn
      FellTreasurer-Controller
By: Ryan Park

Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology

Mentor: Paul Kienzle 

Utilizing Machine Learning for 

Anomaly Detection

1
Anomalies

● Contextual Outliers: specific point 

that is anomalous within specific 

context

● Collective Outliers: collection of 

data points that is anomalous 

compared to rest of data

2
Problem

● Closed Cycle Refrigerator (CCR)

● How does it currently work?

○ Control System

■ Setpoint

■ Sensor A, B, C, D

○ Manual troubleshooting (no 

notification or pinpoint system)

2

Sample
4

Unsupervised Machine Learning

● Building an internal representation 

of “normal behavior”

● Identify things that are completely 

new and never before seen as 

anomalous behavior
Objective ● Build and train a transformer 

model for sequence prediction

● Long Term: Tracks and 

predicts every available 

control parameter and sensor 

across the facility for 

anomalies

6
Transfer Learning ● A machine learning technique 

that uses knowledge learned 

from one task to improve 

performance on a related task

● Magnetism Dataset: comprised 

of exclusively normal CCR data ○ 30 individual experiments

7
Predicted

8

Actual
Feature Engineering

● Normalization (respective to each 

experiment)

● Upsample (1 minute)

○ Slicing into 2000 timestamps per 

time series

● Savitzky-Golay Filter

○ Smoothes Data

9
Results

10

197% SMAPE Score 

45% SMAPE Score
Future Work

● Data Augmentation

○ Introduce Gaussian noise in conjunction with Savitzky-Golay Filter

● Known Unknown: trained signal used for labelled anomaly detection

● Next Steps:

○ Create a supervised machine learning model to detect anomalies

○ Identify frequent anomalies

11
Special Thanks to...

Paul Kienzle, Juscelino Leao, Qiang (Alan) Ye

Yun Liu, Paul Butler, William Ratcliff, Jeff Krzywon, 

Julie Borchers, Leland Harriger
Exhibit 12.  Questar Gas Company Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges  Year Ended December 31,200920082007(dollars in millions)EarningsIncome before income taxes$66.0$64.2$59.7Add (deduct):Fixed charges30.127.325.7Capitalized interest(0.3)(0.8)(0.7)Total Earnings$95.8$90.7$84.7Fixed ChargesInterest expense$28.5$25.2$23.8Capitalized interest0.30.80.7Estimate of the interest within rental expense1.31.31.2Total Fixed Charges$30.1$27.3$25.7Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges3.23.33.3  For purposes of this presentation, earnings represent income before income taxes adjusted for fixed charges. Fixed charges consist of total interest charges (expensed and capitalized), amortization of debt issuance costs and losses from reacquired debt, and the interest portion of rental expense estimated at 50%.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 21

                        SUBSIDIARIES OF FRESH FOODS, INC.


Claremont Restaurant Group, LLC (NC)

Fresh Foods Restaurant Group, LLC (DE)

Mom 'n' Pop's Country Ham, LLC (NC)

Pierre Leasing, LLC (NC)

Sagebrush of South Carolina, LLC (SC)

Spicewood, Inc. (DE)

Fresh Foods Properties, LLC (NC)

Fresh Foods Sales, LLC (NC)

Pierre Foods, LLC (NC)

Sagebrush of North Carolina, LLC (NC)

Sagebrush of Tennessee, L.P. (DE)

Sunshine WSMP, Inc. (FL)