Thesis (doctoral)--Københavns universitet, 1957. / Errata slip inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 221-[223]).

Thesis (doctoral)--Københavns universitet, 1957. / Errata slip inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 221-[223]).

Diss.--Theologische Fakultät--Erlangen-Nürnberg--Univ., 1988. / Bibliogr. p. 346-379.

Texte remanié de: Habilitationsschrift--Evangelische Theologie--Hamburg--Universität, 1999. / Bibliogr. p. 358-422.

Inaug.-Diss.--Münster. / Vita. Bibliography: p. 216-228.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1975. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

INTRODUCTION: Sight-resight studies are performed to estimate population sizes, in this case dog populations in rabies endemic areas. AIM: This study compares one- and two-day sight-resight methods with two-day as the standard to explore the feasibility and accuracy of the one-day method in different vaccination campaign strategies and dog population characteristics. METHODS: 2015 household survey data and sight-resight data are analyzed to find the percentage of free roaming and confined dogs in the community and use those to adjust the population estimate formulas. 2016 sight-resight data are analyzed as a two-day campaign and as if it had been a one-day campaign. In a sensitivity analysis, confidence intervals are explored in relation to vaccination coverage. RESULTS: Before missed mark and proportion free-roaming corrections, the one-day method results in slightly underestimated population estimates to the two-day method when the vaccination campaign is central point, overestimated when door-to-door, and far underestimated when capture, vaccinate, release. After corrections door-to-door estimates were accurate whereas central point and capture, vaccinate, release estimates substantially underestimated population sizes. DISCUSSION: Results suggest that the one-day mark-resight method could be used to conserve resources depending on the vaccination method and estimated coverage.

Thesis (Ph.D.) - Carleton University, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 98-100). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Academic diss.--Faculty of humanities--Umeå--Umeå university, 1996. / Bibliogr. p. [231]-242. Index.

A labeling of a graph G is said to be r-distinguishing if no automorphism of G preserves all of the vertex labels. The smallest such number r for which there is an r-distinguishing labeling on G is called the distinguishing number of G. The distinguishing set of a group Gamma, D(Gamma), is the set of distinguishing numbers of graphs G in which Aut(G) = Gamma. It is shown that D(Gamma) is non-empty for any finite group Gamma. In particular, D(D_n) is found where D_n is the dihedral group with 2n elements. From there, the generalized Petersen graphs, GP(n,k), are defined and the automorphism groups and distinguishing numbers of such graphs are given. / Master of Science