\begin{table*}%t6
\caption{Comparison of the multiplicity frequency per binary (MF/wB and~MF/B) and the companion star frequency per binary (CSF/wB and~CSF/B) 
of our work with those derived from previous multiplicity surveys among T~Tauri stars in a~similar separation range $\sim$14--1700~AU$^a$, and with 
recent numerical simulations (bottom part). Also indicated are the number of wide (separation $>$0$\farcs$5) binaries~(wB), binaries~(B), triples~(T), quadruples~(Q) and higher multiples ($>$4).}\label{Tab:mult_other_surveys}
\small%\centerline
$${
\begin{tabular}{llcccccr@{~$\pm$~}lr@{~$\pm$~}lr@{~$\pm$~}lr@{~$\pm$~}l}
\hline\hline
Reference                      & cloud   	& wB & B & T & Q & $>$4 &  \multicolumn{2}{c}{MF/wB} 	&  \multicolumn{2}{c}{CSF/wB} &  \multicolumn{2}{c}{MF/B} 	&  \multicolumn{2}{c}{CSF/B}\\
\hline
This work           			&   several   				&  30 & 42.3 & 5 & 6 & -- &  26.8 & 8.1\% &   0.68 &	0.13  &    20.6   &  6.2\%  &   0.53   &   0.10 \\
\multicolumn{15}{c}{Other multiplicity surveys}	 \\	
\hline
L93           		&   Tau-Aur    				&  24 & 39 & 3 & 2 & -- &   17.2 & 7.7\% &   0.41	&	0.12  &    11.4   &  5.1\%  &   0.27   &   0.08 \\
KL98  		&   Tau-Aur    				&  21 & 30 & 6 & 1 & -- &   25.0 & 9.4\% &   0.54	&	0.14  &    18.9   &  7.2\%  &   0.41   &   0.11  \\
G97            	&   Cha/Lup/CrA    			&  19 & 21 & 2 & --  & -- &   9.5   & 6.7\% &   0.19	&	0.10  &    8.7     &  6.1\%  &   0.17   &   0.09 \\
K00     		&   Sco-Cen		   		& 24  & 37 & 6 & -- & -- &  20.0	&	8.2\% 		&   0.40	&	0.12  &    14.0   &  5.7\%  &   0.28   &   0.08\\
K01    		&   Cha					&  5   & 16 & 1 & -- & -- &  16.7  	&	16.7\%		&   0.33	&	0.24 &    5.9   &  5.9\%  &   0.12   &   0.08\\
R05    		&   Oph					&  22 & 45 & 5 & -- & -- &  18.5  	&	8.3\%		&   0.37	&	0.12 &    10.0   &  4.5\%  &   0.20   &   0.06\\
Tot(Other surveys)		&				&  115 & 188 & 23 & 3 & -- &  18.4  	&	3.6\%	&   0.39	&	0.05 &    12.2   &  2.4\%  &   0.26   &   0.03 \\
Tot(All surveys)			&				&  132 & 217.3 & 23 & 7 & -- &  18.5  	&	3.4\%	&   0.41	&	0.05 &    12.1   &  2.2\%  &   0.27   &   0.03 \\
\multicolumn{15}{c}{Numerical Simulations}	\\	
\hline
SD03	&   	& --  & 0.21 & 0.08 & 0.03 &  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &  \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &   \multicolumn{2}{c}{34\%}	&   \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.78} \\
D03		&   	& --  & 0.154 & 0.108 & 0.045 &  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &  \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &  \multicolumn{2}{c}{49.8\%}&   \multicolumn{2}{c}{1.14} \\
D04		&   	& --  & 11 & 2 & 2 & 3 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &  \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &  38.9  	&	14.7\%		&   1.28	&	0.27 \\
G04		&   	& --  &  7  & 6  & 2 & 1 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &  \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} &  56.3  	&	18.8\%		&   1.38	&	0.29 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
$$
\medskip
$^a$~This range is assuming that all systems are at 140~pc. Additionally the upper limit is actually set by confusion with background/foreground stars, and varies 
from survey to survey. The surveys of Leinert et~al. (\cite{Leinert_etal1993}), K\"{o}hler \& Leinert (\cite{Koehler_Leinert1998}), and Ghez et~al. (\cite{Ghez_etal1997a}) 
have set their upper limit to~12$\arcsec$ ($\sim$1700~AU at 140~pc), while the surveys of K\"{o}hler et~al. (\cite{Koehler_etal2000b}), K\"{o}hler (\cite{Koehler_2001}) 
and Ratzka et~al. (\cite{Ratzka_etal2005}) have upper limits of~6$\arcsec$.\\   
References: 
L93: Leinert et~al. (\cite{Leinert_etal1993}), 
KL98: K\"{o}hler \& Leinert (\cite{Koehler_Leinert1998}), 
G97:  Ghez et~al. (\cite{Ghez_etal1997a}), 
K00: K\"{o}hler et~al. (\cite{Koehler_etal2000b}), 
K01: K\"{o}hler (\cite{Koehler_2001}), 
R05: Ratzka et~al. (\cite{Ratzka_etal2005}), 
SD03: Sterzik \& Durisen (\cite{Sterzik_Durisen2003}),
D03: Delgado-Donate et~al. (\cite{Delgado_Donate_etal2003}), 
D04: Delgado-Donate et~al. (\cite{Delgado_Donate_etal2004}), 
G04: Goodwin et~al. (\cite{Goodwin_etal2004}).
\end{table*}