Table 2.

Comparison of varying width

Entry Formula				SimEnum
	n	K	w	time (s)	nodes	solutions
		2	0	0.51	55,196	6
		2	1	3.58	400,501	44
		2	2	7.58	835,509	503
C00062	26	2	3	10.84	1,163,548	2,351
C6H14N2O4		2	4	12.55	1,349,057	5,430
		2	5	13.29	1,431,075	9,852
		2	50	14.31	1,537,496	25,425
		2	0	0.34	35,952	9
		2	1	8.39	845,760	25
		2	2	48.27	4,815,369	41
C03343	37	2	3	149.83	14,781,738	305
C16H22O4		2	4	377.01	37,435,878	40,732
		2	5	639.68	63,459,180	106,870
		2	50	1118.75	110,703,034	510,079
		2	0	2.33	111,781	16
		2	1	46.81	2,246,578	238
		2	2	96.52	4,715,072	1,375
C07178	46	2	3	152.18	7,420,060	6,824
C21H28N2O5		2	4	179.42	8,744,563	19,180
		2	5	199.66	9,677,513	29,891
		2	50	255.01	12,292,587	54,861
		5	0	19.50	1,482,017	2
		5	1	220.14	16,063,569	5
		5	2	439.12	33,037,741	32
C03690	61	5	3	684.88	52,207,745	178
C24H38O4		5	4	1024.96	78,509,554	349
		5	5	1285.55	98,762,291	615
		5	50	T.O.	136,835,134	N.F.

Comparison of the performance for varying w for the problem ETULF.