60 views

Uploaded by Seema Soleja

bart hobijn uc berkeley econ 141 linear regression slides lecture 2

- The Man-hour Estimation Models Its Comparison of Interim Products Assembly for Shipbuilding
- MB Lecture 2
- Final Thesis
- final report
- Site Selection Writeup
- MIT15_450F10_rec10.pdf
- Economics 138 Syllabus
- Part 2 Rothart Empirical Research Methods
- Wooldridge
- 168
- TUGAS STATISTIK
- A review on advanced multi-optimization methods for WEDM
- Week 05
- Hetrosadastisity
- 08
- IELTS Help
- hasil uji spss.docx
- Multi Regression
- jurnal skripsi inggris
- Ros

You are on page 1of 74

Econ 141 Spring 2014

Lecture: February 02 and 05, 2014

Bart Hobijn

The views expressed in these lecture notes are solely those of the instructor and do not necessarily

reflect those of the UC Berkeley, or other institutions with which he is affiliated.

2/03&05/2014

MPC: Marginal Propensity to Consume

Suppose households pre-tax income

increases by a dollar, what fraction of this

dollar would they end up spending versus

paying in taxes or saving?

2/03&05/2014

Basic equation

= 0 + 1 +

0

1

Average consumption expenditures per household

Average pre-tax income per household

Average consumption level at zero income

Marginal propensity to consume (MPC)

MSA-specific deviation from average linear

relationship between income and spending

2/03&05/2014

MSA

()

Spending

( )

Income

( )

MSA

()

Spending

( )

Income

( )

Chicago

57.7

74.4

Atlanta

51.9

71.2

Detroit

50.5

79.8

Miami

40.6

58.9

MinneapolisSt. Paul

56.7

66.8

DallasFort Worth

57.1

71.0

Cleveland

48.0

65.9

Houston

58.2

73.5

New York

58.7

80.2

55.3

69.6

Philadelphia

53.5

71.7

73.6

98.2

Boston

65.0

79.8

San Diego

56.2

76.4

Washington,

D.C.

77.9

111.9

Seattle

60.7

74.1

Baltimore

62.3

96.9

Phoenix

53.7

63.2

Los

Angeles

San

Francisco

Note: Spending and income are annual average across households in thousands of dollars

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey

2/03&05/2014

Data scatterplot

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

Washington,

D.C.

80

San

Francisco

70

Boston

Baltimore

Seattle

60

New York

Houston

DallasChicago

MinneapolisLos

Fort WorthSan Diego

St. Paul

Angeles

Phoenix

Philadelphia

Atlanta

Detroit

50

Cleveland

Miami

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

Data scatterplot

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

Estimate of MPC ( )?

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

Estimate of MPC ( )?

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

70

60

50

defined by and ?

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

2/03&05/2014

= 0 + 1 +

0

1

2/03&05/2014

observation number

dependent variable (regressand)

independent (explanatory) variable (regressor)

intercept / constant

slope coefficient

error term / residual

10

= 0 + 1 +

Population

regression line /

observation

number

0

1

intercept / constant

slope coefficient

error term / residual

2/03&05/2014

dependent(explanatory)

and independent variable.

independent

variable (regressor)

11

= 0 + 1 +

0

1

2/03&05/2014

observation number

deviation from

dependent variableObservation-specific

(regressand)

dependent and

independent

variable.

(explanatory)

variable

(regressor)

independent

intercept / constant

slope coefficient

error term / residual

12

= 0 + 1 +

0

1

2/03&05/2014

observation number

dependent variable (regressand)

Why

we need to estimate

independent

(explanatory)

variable (regressor)

Observed:

Sample , for = 1, , .

Intercept

/ constant

Slope

coefficient

Unobserved:

Parameters 0 and 1 as well

as error

for = 1, , .

error

termterms

/ residual

13

OLS estimates:

Choose 0 and 1 to minimize the sum of squared

residuals (SSR)

0 , 1 = argmin

1 ,2

0 1

=1

Properties:

What is solution for 0 , 1 ?

Are 0 , 1 consistent estimates of true 0 and 1 ?

What is their asymptotic distribution?

2/03&05/2014

14

Solution for ,

First order necessary condition for

2

0=

0 1 =

0 1

0

0

=1

= 2

=1

0 1

=1

Solving for 0

1

0=

1

0=

0 1 .

=1

0 1 = 0 1

=1

Such that

0 = 1

2/03&05/2014

15

Solution for ,

First order necessary condition for

2

0=

0 1 =

1

1

1

=1

=1

= 2

=1

1

0=

2/03&05/2014

=1

16

Solution for ,

First order necessary condition for

2

0=

0 1 =

1

1

1

=1

=1

= 2

=1

1

0=

0=

2/03&05/2014

=1

=1 0 1

Econ 141, Spring 2014

17

Solution for ,

First order necessary condition for

2

0=

0 1 =

1

1

1

=1

=1

= 2

=1

1

0=

1

=

=1

=1

2/03&05/2014

1

1

= 1 2 .

=1

18

Solution for ,

First order necessary condition for

2

0=

0 1 =

1

1

1

=1

=1

= 2

=1

1

0=

1

=

2/03&05/2014

=1

=1

1

1

= 1 2 .

=1

19

OLS estimators of and :

1 =

=1

1

2

=1

0 = 1

= 0 + 1 ,

= ,

2/03&05/2014

predicted/fitted value of

residual

Econ 141, Spring 2014

20

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

21

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

San Francisco

70

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

22

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

San Francisco

70

60

50

pre-tax income is 56

cents on the dollar

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

23

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures in

SF higher than

predicted by

regression

Expenditures

90

80

San Francisco

73.6

70

69.6

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

24

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

Residual:

San Francisco

73.6

70

69.6

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

25

Goodness of fit

Main question

What fraction of the variance of the

dependent variable, , is explained by the

regression line rather than unexplained?

(unexplained means part of the residuals)

Variance accounting

=

=1

=1

=1

2/03&05/2014

a.k.a. model sum of squares

=1

a.k.a. residual sum of squares

26

+

=1

=1

+

=1

0 + 1 +

=1

1 + 1 +

=1

=

=1

2/03&05/2014

+ 21

1 +

=1

2 .

+

=1

=1

27

+

=1

=1

+

=1

0 + 1 +

=1

1 + 1 +

=1

=1

+ 21

1 +

=1

2 .

+

=1

=1

=1

= according to first-order

necessary condition derived on slide 17.

2/03&05/2014

28

+

=1

=1

+

=1

0 + 1 +

=1

1 + 1 +

=1

=

=1

+ 21

1 +

=1

2 .

+

=1

=1

1 =

2/03&05/2014

29

=1

+

=1

=1

0 + 1 +

=1

1 + 1 +

=1

=

=1

+ 21

=1

2/03&05/2014

1 +

=1

+

=1

=1

2 = + .

+

=1

30

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

San Francisco

70

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

31

Measure Equation

Value

Share

(percentage)

ESS

=1

SSR

=1

TSS

2/03&05/2014

=1

944.0

74.9

316.4

25.1

1260.3

100.0

32

Measure Equation

Value

Share

(percentage)

ESS

=1

SSR

=1

TSS

2/03&05/2014

=1

944.0

74.9

316.4

25.1

1260.3

100.0

the dependent variable, i.e.

of , explained by the

regression line. = . .

33

Measure Equation

Value

Share

(percentage)

ESS

=1

SSR

=1

TSS

=1

944.0

74.9

316.4

25.1

1260.3

100.0

= , where =

is

=

an unbiased estimate of variance of

residuals

2/03&05/2014

34

= , where

1

2

=1

If we had only two observations we would be able to

perfectly fit a straight line and residuals would be

zero.

2/03&05/2014

35

= , where

1

2

=1

If we had only two observations we would be able to

perfectly fit a straight line and residuals would be

zero.

Estimate of standard deviation of deviation from the

regression line.

2/03&05/2014

36

Average Income and Expenditures by major MSA

Annual income and expenditures by household; 000's dollars; 2012

Expenditures

90

80

San Francisco

70

60

50

40

30

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Income

Source: Consumer Expenditure Survey by MSA

2/03&05/2014

37

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Dependent variable: Expenditures

Regression Statistics

Multiple R

0.865434015

R Square

0.748976034

Adjusted R Square

0.733287037

Standard Error

4.446724217

Observations

18

ANOVA

df

Regression

Residual

Total

Intercept

Income

2/03&05/2014

SS

943.9589518

316.3737002

1260.332652

MS

943.9589518

19.77335626

F

Significance F

47.73893411 3.51406E-06

14.69690817

6.304502449

0.558872878

0.080886618

t Stat

2.331176535

6.909336734

P-value

Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

0.033146025 1.331960021 28.061856 1.33196002 28.06185632

3.51406E-06 0.387400909 0.7303448 0.38740091 0.730344847

1

16

17

estimated

intercept

38

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Dependent variable: Expenditures

Regression Statistics

Multiple R

0.865434015

R Square

0.748976034

Adjusted R Square

0.733287037

Standard Error

4.446724217

Observations

18

ANOVA

df

Regression

Residual

Total

Intercept

Income

SS

943.9589518

316.3737002

1260.332652

MS

943.9589518

19.77335626

F

Significance F

47.73893411 3.51406E-06

14.69690817

6.304502449

0.558872878

0.080886618

t Stat

2.331176535

6.909336734

P-value

Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

0.033146025 1.331960021 28.061856 1.33196002 28.06185632

3.51406E-06 0.387400909 0.7303448 0.38740091 0.730344847

1

16

17

estimated slope

2/03&05/2014

39

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Dependent variable: Expenditures

Regression Statistics

Multiple R

0.865434015

R Square

0.748976034

Adjusted R Square

0.733287037

Standard Error

4.446724217

Observations

18

sample size

ANOVA

df

Regression

Residual

Total

Intercept

Income

2/03&05/2014

SS

943.9589518

316.3737002

1260.332652

MS

943.9589518

19.77335626

F

Significance F

47.73893411 3.51406E-06

14.69690817

6.304502449

0.558872878

0.080886618

t Stat

2.331176535

6.909336734

P-value

Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

0.033146025 1.331960021 28.061856 1.33196002 28.06185632

3.51406E-06 0.387400909 0.7303448 0.38740091 0.730344847

1

16

17

40

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Dependent variable: Expenditures

Regression Statistics

Multiple R

0.865434015

R Square

0.748976034

Adjusted R Square

0.733287037

Standard Error

4.446724217

Observations

18

ANOVA

df

Regression

Residual

Total

Intercept

Income

2/03&05/2014

SS

943.9589518

316.3737002

1260.332652

MS

943.9589518

19.77335626

14.69690817

6.304502449

0.558872878

0.080886618

t Stat

2.331176535

6.909336734

1

16

17

F

Significance F

47.73893411 3.51406E-06

P-value

Lowersum

95% Upper

95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

Total

of squares

0.033146025 1.331960021 28.061856 1.33196002 28.06185632

3.51406E-06 0.387400909 0.7303448 0.38740091 0.730344847

41

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Dependent variable: Expenditures

Regression Statistics

Multiple R

0.865434015

R Square

0.748976034

Adjusted R Square

0.733287037

Standard Error

4.446724217

Observations

18

ANOVA

df

Regression

Residual

Total

Intercept

Income

2/03&05/2014

SS

943.9589518

316.3737002

1260.332652

MS

943.9589518

19.77335626

F

Significance F

47.73893411 3.51406E-06

14.69690817

6.304502449

0.558872878

0.080886618

t Stat

2.331176535

6.909336734

Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

0.033146025 1.331960021 28.061856 1.33196002 28.06185632

3.51406E-06 0.387400909 0.7303448 0.38740091 0.730344847

1

16

17

42

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Dependent variable: Expenditures

Regression Statistics

Multiple R

0.865434015

R Square

0.748976034

Adjusted R Square

0.733287037

Standard Error

4.446724217

Observations

18

ANOVA

df

Regression

Residual

Total

Intercept

Income

2/03&05/2014

SS

943.9589518

316.3737002

1260.332652

MS

943.9589518

19.77335626

F

Significance F

47.73893411 3.51406E-06

14.69690817

6.304502449

0.558872878

0.080886618

t Stat

2.331176535

6.909336734

P-value

Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

0.033146025 1.331960021 28.061856 1.33196002 28.06185632

1

16

17

1

=

2

=1

43

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Dependent variable: Expenditures

Regression Statistics

Multiple R

0.865434015

R Square

0.748976034

Adjusted R Square

0.733287037

Standard Error

4.446724217

Observations

18

ANOVA

df

Regression

Residual

Total

Intercept

Income

2/03&05/2014

SS

943.9589518

316.3737002

1260.332652

MS

943.9589518

19.77335626

F

Significance F

47.73893411 3.51406E-06

14.69690817

6.304502449

0.558872878

0.080886618

t Stat

2.331176535

6.909336734

Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%

0.033146025 1.331960021 28.061856 1.33196002 28.06185632

3.51406E-06 0.387400909 0.7303448 0.38740091 0.730344847

1

16

17

44

Most common estimation method

Implemented in many different applications

Most common methodology. Thus important to

understand.

Under relatively general conditions OLS estimates

are

Consistent

Unbiased

Have tractable asymptotic distribution

2/03&05/2014

45

Most common estimation method

Implemented in many different applications

Most common methodology. Thus important to

understand.

Under relatively general conditions OLS estimates

are

Consistent

Unbiased

Have tractable asymptotic distribution

2/03&05/2014

46

= 0 + 1 + , where = 1, ,

No information in about

= = 0

2/03&05/2014

47

= 0 + 1 + , where = 1, ,

No information in about

= = 0

Suppose not and instead = , then we can write

= 0 + 1 + = 0 + 1 + +

= 0 + 1 + + = 0 + 1 +

where

= = = 0

So, in this case there is an alternative representation of the

linear regression line with a different slope parameter,

1 = 1 + , that satisfies this assumption.

2/03&05/2014

48

= 0 + 1 + , where = 1, ,

No information in about

= = 0

Note, this implies that

= = 0

Which, given = 0 implies that

cov , = = 0

2/03&05/2014

49

= 0 + 1 + , where = 1, ,

No information in about

= = 0

, well-behaved random variables

, , = 1, , , are independently drawn from

identical joint distribution.

Large outliers are unlikely.

2/03&05/2014

50

= 0 + 1 + , where = 1, ,

No information in about

= = 0

, well-behaved random variables

, , = 1, , , are independently drawn from

identical joint distribution.

Large outliers are unlikely.

Last two assumptions are made such that we can apply LLN

and CLT to derive properties of 0 and 1 .

2/03&05/2014

51

Properties of 0 and 1

Properties of 0 and 1 are derived by manipulating

the first-order necessary conditions from slides 15 and

17.

1

0=

and

1

0=

2/03&05/2014

0 1

=1

0 1

=1

1

=

1

=

=1

=1

52

Properties of 0 and 1

Properties of 0 and 1 are derived by manipulating

the first-order necessary conditions from slides 15 and

17.

1

0=

and

1

0=

0 1

=1

0 1

=1

1

=

1

=

=1

=1

= = 0

2/03&05/2014

53

Consistency of 1

0=

0 1 =

=1

1

=

=1

0 + 1 + 0 1 1

=1

1

=

=1

1

= 1 1

2/03&05/2014

=1

1 1 +

1

2

+

.

=1

54

Consistency of 1

0=

0 1 =

=1

1

=

=1

0 + 1 + 0 1 1

=1

1

=

=1

1

= 1 1

2/03&05/2014

=1

1 1 +

1

2

+

.

=1

>

, =

55

Consistency of 1

0=

0 1 =

=1

1

=

=1

0 + 1 + 0 1 1

=1

1

=

=1

1

= 1 1

=1

1 1 +

1

2

+

=1

0 = 1 1 var .

Such that

1 1

2/03&05/2014

0, that is 1

1

56

Consistency of 1

0=

0 1 =

=1

1

=

=1

0 + 1 + 0 1 1

=1

=large, i.e.

1

1 of+the

,our

estimate

=1

slope

coefficient,

, gets arbitrarily

1

1

close to the true parameter

value

= 1 1

2 +

=1

=1

0 = 1 1 var .

Such that

1 1

2/03&05/2014

0, that is 1

1

57

Small sample properties of OLS estimators

Unbiasedness

On average OLS estimate equals true

parameter value of interest.

Asymptotic distribution

OLS assumptions imply we can use CLT to

derive asymptotic normal distribution of OLS

estimates, that can be used as approximation

when is big.

2/03&05/2014

58

Unbiasedness of 1

1

0 = 1 1

=1

1

2 +

.

=1

Such that

1

1 = 1 +

=1

=1

1

= 1 +

1

=1

=1

1

1

=1

=1

E 1 = E 1 + E

= 1 + E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

1

=1

=1 E

= 1 + E

= 1 +E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

=1 0

= 1 + E

= 1

1

2

=1

2/03&05/2014

59

Unbiasedness of 1

1

0 = 1 1

=1

1

2 +

.

=1

Such that

1

1

=1 we

=1

Here

is

where

1 = 1 +

= 1 +

1

1

2

2

apply second

=1

=1

conditionyields

from slide 43

Taking expectations

1

1

=1

=1

E 1 = E 1 + E

= 1 + E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

1

=1

=1 E

= 1 + E

= 1 +E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

=1 0

= 1 + E

= 1

1

2

=1

2/03&05/2014

60

Unbiasedness of 1

1

0 = 1 1

=1

1

2 +

.

=1

Such that

1

1 = 1 +

=1

=1

1

= 1 +

1

=1

=1

1

condition

from

slide 43 1

=1

=1

E 1 = E 1 + E

= 1 + E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

1

=1

=1 E

= 1 + E

= 1 +E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

=1 0

= 1 + E

= 1

1

2

=1

2/03&05/2014

61

Unbiasedness of 1

=1

=1

1

1

0 = 1 1

2 +

.

Such that

1

coefficient,1 =1

equal

the

true

parameter

, will

=1

1 =

1 from

+

= 1 +

value

line.

1the population regression

1

=1

= . Thus, unbiased.

=1

1

1

=1

=1

E 1 = E 1 + E

= 1 + E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

1

=1

=1 E

= 1 + E

= 1 +E

1

1

2

2

=1

=1

1

=1 0

= 1 + E

= 1

1

2

=1

2/03&05/2014

62

Unbiasedness of 1

1

0 = 1 1

1

2 +

=1 first condition

=1 that

Such that

E = 0

1 for OLS to be unbiased.

1

is crucial

=1

=1

1 +

If this

condition

the= average

1 =

1+

1 is not true

1 OLS

2

2

=1

=1

estimate

will

deviate

from

Taking expectations yields

E 1

1

= E 1 + E

1

= 1 + E

2/03&05/2014

=1

=1

1

2

=1

E 1 , ,

1

=1

1

= 1 + E

1

1

= 1 + E

1

= 1 +E

=1

=1

=1

=1

=1

E

1

=1

= 1

63

Asymptotic distribution of 1

1

1 1 =

1

=

1

1

2

=1

=1

=1

=1

See slide 48

1. Apply CLT to numerator

2. Apply LLN to denominator

3. Combine using Slutskys theorem (S&W page 676)

2/03&05/2014

64

Apply CLT to

=1

=

Condition 1 from slide 47: E = 0

Conditions 2&3 from slide 50 imply that

var exists and is finite.

CLT applies to sample mean of .

1

=

=1

Note that: 1 1 = 2

2/03&05/2014

65

Apply CLT to

=1

E

=

=

var

var

Such that

0, var

0,1

1 1 = 2

has an asymptotic distribution that is normal

with a mean equal to zero.

2/03&05/2014

66

Apply LLN to

can apply the Law of Large Numbers to 2

and that 2 converges in probability to the

variance of , i.e. to var .

Thus

2

var

numerator and denominator of 1 1 = 2

the only thing left is to combine them.

2/03&05/2014

67

asymptotic properties of

0, var

and

2

var

such that

1 1 =

2 0,

var

var

and thus

1 = 1 +

2/03&05/2014

var

1 ,

var

68

Thus as sample size get large then estimated

slope coefficient has approximately a normal

distribution, such that

1 ~ 1 , 1

where

1 = 1

2

1

2/03&05/2014

var

var

1 var

var 2

69

Thus as sample size get large then estimated

slope coefficient has approximately a normal

distribution, such that

Remember:

1 ~ 1 , 1

= . Thus, unbiased.

where

1 = 1

2

1

2/03&05/2014

var

var

1 var

var 2

70

Thus as sample size get large then estimated

slope coefficient has approximately a normal

distribution, such that

Remember:

1 ~ 1 , 1

2

as

where

1 = 1

1

2

1

2/03&05/2014

. Thus, consistent.

var

var

1 var

var 2

71

1 has tractable

asymptotic distribution

This term is like a noise to signal ratio.

The numerator is related to variance of the

residual

The denominator is related to the variance of the

slope coefficient

has approximately a normal

explanatory variable

distribution,

thatin the explanatory variable

The largesuch

the variation

relative to the residual the more accurate the

1OLS

~estimate.

1 , 1

where

1 = 1

2

1

2/03&05/2014

var

var

1 var

var 2

72

Asymptotic normality of OLS coefficients

allows us to

Do hypothesis tests

Calculate confidence intervals

applied to the population mean.

2/03&05/2014

73

Summary

Linear regression

model

OLS estimators

2 and

OLS conditions

Even-numbered

problems:

4.2, 4.4, 4.6, 4.10,

4.12, 4.14

Study STATA tutorial

Consistency of 1

Unbiasedness of 1

Asymptotic distribution

of 1

2/03&05/2014

Empirical exercises

next week.

74

- The Man-hour Estimation Models Its Comparison of Interim Products Assembly for ShipbuildingUploaded byFrans Truly Aritonang
- MB Lecture 2Uploaded byrui
- Final ThesisUploaded byPrince Wamiq
- final reportUploaded byapi-465329396
- Site Selection WriteupUploaded byjoyarciga
- MIT15_450F10_rec10.pdfUploaded byaluiscg
- Economics 138 SyllabusUploaded byda.hved
- Part 2 Rothart Empirical Research MethodsUploaded byjulile
- WooldridgeUploaded byamudaryo
- 168Uploaded byMiguel Monsanto
- TUGAS STATISTIKUploaded byJae Herin
- A review on advanced multi-optimization methods for WEDMUploaded byijsret
- Week 05Uploaded byKshipra Koranne
- HetrosadastisityUploaded byCanwal Raza
- 08Uploaded byS Tunkla Echaroj
- IELTS HelpUploaded byMuhammad Saim
- hasil uji spss.docxUploaded byMurniUkhuahIslami
- Multi RegressionUploaded byfansuri80
- jurnal skripsi inggrisUploaded byTaufikSatria
- RosUploaded bySang Penggila Hujan
- raporUploaded byFatih Altinbaş
- Regression analysisUploaded bypavellaha
- ECO3411 Final Exam Notecard.docxUploaded byadam
- 06 02 Regression Analysis 2Uploaded byJohn Bofarull Guix
- Additional Sample Questions 15-16_hintsUploaded byHappy Adela
- LRweek2Uploaded bypostscript
- RegressionUploaded byAna-Maria Zaiceanu
- Multiple RegressionUploaded byColleenMaimaiChimee
- OutputUploaded byDionisia Dini Nugraheni
- Regression, Correlation Analysis and Chi-Square AnalysisUploaded bySaif Ali

- Quiz_8Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- Quiz7Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- 2014 04 28 and 30Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- ps2_11Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- MATH 113 Textbook NotesUploaded bySeema Soleja
- Exam 4C SyllabusUploaded bysweetindianboy111
- 2014 04 14Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- Math 170 NotesUploaded bySeema Soleja
- Guo+Spring+08+PUploaded byAlyn Lee 南宫竹轩
- Risk MeasuresUploaded bySeema Soleja
- GDPC1Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- 2014 01 22Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- Marcel Finan's EXAM MLC Guide for Actuarial Exams.Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- Week 14 - Halko Martinsson and TroppUploaded bySeema Soleja
- Demmel Chapter 1Uploaded bySeema Soleja
- Complex Variables and Applications-Solutions Manual JW Brown RV ChurchillUploaded bySeema Soleja
- Problem Set III - RevUploaded bySeema Soleja
- Matlab NotesUploaded byRohit Vishal Kumar

- Van Lier 1994 Forks and Hope - Pursuing Understanding in Different WaysUploaded byhoorie
- comparison of iso samplingUploaded byArchie Trugo
- Incomplete 3I's[1]Uploaded byAlfredo Sinconiegue
- Critical Thinking 9-16.pptUploaded bychelsee
- Utsg Sta220 Midterm 2011fUploaded byexamkiller
- ApaUploaded byAdorablé Perez
- teaching method analysis a12v6 1Uploaded byapi-313158624
- 01 IntroductionUploaded byfarfouuur
- Operation research-class notesUploaded byAllison Townsend
- ex4480Uploaded byTin Htun Aung
- The Impact of Accounting InformationUploaded bynobleconsultants
- Mont4e SmUploaded bymarwan
- IE241 Hypothesis TestingUploaded byAnonymous RJtBkn
- BTEC QCFUploaded byHafizah Ezani
- Science and Technology PolicyUploaded byAminul Islam
- Fractional Partial Differential EquationUploaded bySwaroop S
- Lab 4 RegressionUploaded byMuhammad Awais
- Comparative TheoryUploaded byantoniocaraffa
- Publish or Perish Clapham 2005 Bio Science 55-5Uploaded bymangione_antonio
- 1 Introduction - Electron Microscopy and DiffractionUploaded byHoang Lam
- NormalityUploaded byEDYLON01
- Action Research Chapter 6Uploaded bykadriye
- RM Project IV-Th SemUploaded byPramod Barela
- Appendix c and d Page83-99Uploaded byjerryabbey
- Analysing Practical ActivitiesUploaded byMadhu Rao
- testUploaded byGanesan Saseetharan
- Muka DepanUploaded byAldrige Abdon
- Stat Assignment 1Uploaded byCrystal Welch
- HW2Uploaded byjaijailyc
- Patient Safety USMLEUploaded bysdroyafmc