No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

RESULTS OF EXPONENTIAL FITS TO ELASTIC CROSS SECTIONS.

DIFFERENTIAL CROSS SECTIONS FOR INELASTIC EVENTS.

DIFFERENTIAL CROSS SECTIONS FOR INELASTIC EVENTS.

EXPONENTIAL FITS TO THE INELASTIC CROSS SECTIONS.

EXPONENTIAL FITS TO THE INELASTIC CROSS SECTIONS.

EXPONENTIAL FITS TO THE INELASTIC CROSS SECTIONS.

EXPONENTIAL FITS TO THE INELASTIC CROSS SECTIONS.

INELASTIC DIFFERENTIAL CROSS SECTIONS. ELASTIC SIGNALS HAVE BEEN SUBTRACTED.

INELASTIC DIFFERENTIAL CROSS SECTIONS. ELASTIC SIGNALS HAVE BEEN SUBTRACTED.

DIFFERENTIAL CROSS SECTIONS INCLUDING THE ELASTIC SIGNALS. THE DATA BEYOND M**2 = 2GEV ARE IDENTICAL TO TABLE 2. THE CROSS SECTIONS EXTEND TO NEGATIVE M**2 DUE TO THE FINITE RESOLUTION OF THE EXPERIMENT.

DIFFERENTIAL CROSS SECTIONS INCLUDING THE ELASTIC SIGNALS. THE DATA BEYOND M**2 = 2GEV ARE IDENTICAL TO TABLE 2. THE CROSS SECTIONS EXTEND NEGATIVE M**2 DUE TO THE FINITE RESOLUTION OF THE EXPERIMENT.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.30-0.33. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.33-0.36. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.36-0.39. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.39-0.42. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.54-0.60. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.60-0.66. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.66-0.72. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.21-0.24 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.24-0.27 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.27-0.30 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.30-0.33 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.33-0.36 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.36-0.39 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.39-0.42 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.54-0.63 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.63-0.72 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.18-0.21 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.21-0.24 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.24-0.27 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.27-0.30 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.30-0.33 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.33-0.36 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.45-0.48 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.48-0.51 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.51-0.54 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.54-0.63 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.63-0.72 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

VALUES OF Q**2 CORRESPONDING TO THE ENTRIES IN THIS TABLE ARE 15., 20., 27., 36., 48. RESPECTIVELY.

VALUES OF Q**2 CORRESPONDING TO THE ENTRIES IN THIS TABLE ARE 11.5, 15., 20., 27., 36., RESPECTIVELY.

VALUES OF Q**2 CORRESPONDING TO THE ENTRIES IN THIS TABLE ARE 27., 36., 48., 65. RESPECTIVELY.

VALUES OF Q**2 CORRESPONDING TO THE ENTRIES IN THIS TABLE ARE 15., 20., 27., 36., 48.,65., 90. RESPECTIVELY.

VALUES OF Q**2 CORRESPONDING TO THE ENTRIES IN THIS TABLE ARE 11.5, 15., 20., 27., 36., 48.,65.RESPECTIVELY.