142 views

Uploaded by Hyc Tc

- t-test
- Cost Accounting Level 3/series 2-2009
- Advanced Business Calculations Level 3/series 4-2009
- Accounting/Series-2-2011(Code3012)
- A Statistical Journey: A Taming of the Skew! by D.F. DeMoulin & W.A. Kritsonis
- STA6166_HW5_Ramin_Shamshiri_Solution
- Cost Accounting Level 3/Series 2 2008 (Code 3016)
- 2010 LCCI Level 3 Series 2 Model Answers (Code 3012)
- Math 533 Week 8 Final Exam
- Advanced Business Calculations/Series-4-2011(Code3003)
- ASE3003209MA
- Lcci Level3 Solution Past Paper Series 3-10
- Hypothesis Test for Inferential Statistics
- Assignment 02 (a)
- Q.T
- 1. Statistical Method and Data Analysis - Introduction
- Theory of Decision
- quiz 3_practice.pdf
- Data Analysis Report
- Sample Exam for Luminita Stevens Intermediate Macroeconomics

You are on page 1of 31

Business Statistics

THIRD LEVEL

Series 2 (Code 3609) 2001

Malaysia

>f2[EW2r@o2`8r>u3]@o2r2[8r#

Business Statistics Third Level (Malaysia)

Series 2 2001

Examiners’ Reports and Model Answers have been developed by LCCIEB to offer additional

information and guidance to Centres, teachers and candidates as they prepare for LCCIEB

examinations. The contents of this booklet are divided into 5 elements:

providing general guidance where it applies across the

examination as a whole

(3) Model Answers – summary of the main points that the Chief Examiner expected to

see in the answers to each question in the examination paper

(4) Examiner’s Report – constructive analysis of candidate error, areas of weakness and

other comments that apply to each question in the examination

paper

questions or to examination technique

Teachers and candidates should find this booklet an invaluable teaching tool and an aid to success.

The London Chamber of Commerce and Industry Examinations Board provides Model Answers to

help candidates gain a general understanding of the standard required. The Board accepts that

candidates may offer other answers that could be equally valid.

Note

LCCIEB reserves the right not to produce an Examiner’s Report, either for an examination paper as a

whole or for individual questions, if too few candidates were involved to make an Examiner’s Report

meaningful.

All rights reserved; no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or

transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise

without prior written permission of the Publisher. The book may not be lent, resold, hired out or

otherwise disposed of by way of trade in any form of binding or cover, other than that in which it is

published, without the prior consent of the Publisher.

Typeset, printed and bound by the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry Examinations Board.

1

2

Business Statistics Third Level (Malaysia)

Series 2 2001

GENERAL COMMENTS

The paper followed the usual format and presented a fair examination of candidates’ knowledge of

Third Level Business Statistics. Most candidates were well prepared and so scored high marks. As

ever, there were a small number of candidates who had clearly not prepared to the Third Level

standard. Candidates who rely on Second Level knowledge only will not pass this Third Level paper.

3

4

Business Statistics Third Level (Malaysia)

Series 2 2001

QUESTION 1

A company which specialises in selling electronic products advertises its goods on a monthly basis in

a series of specialist magazines. The company’s head of marketing believes that monthly sales are

linked to monthly advertising expenditure. The table below contains information relating to monthly

sales and monthly advertising expenditure over a twelve month period:

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Sales 120 110 130 120 140 160 160 150 140 180 190 200

(RM 000)

Advertising 6 6 7 5 7 8 8 8 8 9 10 10

Expenditure

(RM 000)

(a) Produce a scatter graph which represents the relationship between monthly sales and monthly

advertising expenditure and comment on the relationship.

(4 marks)

(b) Calculate the product moment correlation coefficient between monthly sales and monthly

advertising expenditure.

(10 marks)

(c) Carry out a suitable test to ascertain whether the correlation coefficient is significantly different

from zero.

(6 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

5

Model Answer to Question 1

(a)

(RM 000) Expenditure

(RM 000)

2 2

x y xy x y

J 6 120 720 36 14,400

F 6 110 660 36 12,100

M 7 130 910 49 16,900

A 5 120 600 25 14,400

M 7 140 980 49 19,600

J 8 160 1,280 64 25,600

J 8 160 1,280 64 25,600

A 8 150 1,200 64 22,500

S 8 140 1,120 64 19,600

O 9 180 1,620 81 32,400

N 10 190 1,900 100 36,100

D 10 200 2,000 100 40,000

92 1,800 14,270 732 279,200

Model Answer to Question 1 continued

Correlation Coefficient

n ∑ xy – ∑ x ∑ y

r=

(n ∑ x 2 – ( ∑ x )2 ) (n ∑ y 2 – ( ∑ y )2 )

r=

((12(732) – (8,464) (12(279,200) – (3,240,000))

5,640

r=

((320) (110,400))

r = 0.9489

(c) H0: ρ = 0, H1 ρ ≠ 0

r n–2

t=

1 – r2

0.9489 12 – 2

t=

1 – 0.9004

3.0007

t= = 9.508

0.3156

There is strong evidence to reject H0. The correlation coefficient is significantly different from

zero.

A relatively straightforward question on correlation which most candidates attempted and scored well

on. Some marks were lost due to poor presentation of graphs.

HELPFUL HINTS

Ensure that you identify which variable is x and which is y. This will help you to set up your graph

axes correctly.

7

QUESTION 2

A study of sickness absence amongst hospital nursing staff was carried out. A random sample of 200

nurses was taken and the number of days of sickness absence per year was recorded. The grade of

each nurse was also recorded.

Grade of nurse Less than 5 5 to 15 More than 15

Student 10 30 10

Newly qualified 10 40 50

Experienced 5 25 20

(a) Carry out an appropriate statistical test to investigate whether there is a relationship between the

grade of a nurse and the number of days of sickness absence per year.

(12 marks)

A previous study of sickness absence amongst nurses showed that the percentage of all nurses

taking less than 5 days absence per year was 15, the percentage taking between 5 and 15 days

absence was 50 and the percentage taking more than 15 days absence was 35.

(b) Combining the grades of nurses from part (a), test whether there has been a change in the

distribution of days of sickness absence per year.

(8 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

8

Model Answer to Question 2

(a)

Observed 10 30 10 50

10 40 50 100

5 25 20 50

25 95 80 200

12.50 47.50 40.00 100.00

6.25 23.75 20.00 50.00

25.00 95.00 80.00 200.00

0.5 1.184211 2.5

0.25 0.065789 0

χ 2 = 13.3947

Null Hypothesis: There is no relationship between the grade of nurse and the number of

days of sickness absence pa

Alternative Hypothesis: There is a relationship between the grade of nurse and the number of

days of sickness absence pa

Significance Level 5% or 1%

Degrees of Freedom (3 – 1) (3 – 1) = 4

Critical χ 2 Value 9.49 or 13.28

The calculated χ 2 value is greater than both critical values, there is strong evidence to reject the

null hypothesis. There does appear to be a strong relationship between the grade of nurse and

the number of days of sickness absence taken each year.

(b) Observed 25 95 80

Expected (% of 200) 30 100 70

2

Contribution to χ 0.8333 0.25 1.4286

2

Calculated χ Value = 2.5119

Alternative Hypothesis: There is a change

Significance Level 5% or 1%

Degrees of Freedom n–1=3–1=2

2

Critical χ Value 5.99 or 9.21

The calculated χ 2 value is less than both critical values, there is no evidence to reject the null

hypothesis. There does not appear to be any change in the distribution of days of sickness

absence since the last study.

9

Examiner’s Report on Question 2

Most candidates scored well on part (a) of this chi squared question. Many seemed confused as to

what was required in part (b). This is a common second part to a chi squared question and candidates

need to be prepared for it.

HELPFUL HINTS

Where the null hypothesis is rejected at 5%, candidates should go on to test at 1%.

Look back at past examination papers to see the different part (b) elements of a chi squared

question.

10

QUESTION 3

(a) Explain the difference between a Laspeyres price index and a Paasche price index. Include in

your answer, an advantage and disadvantage of using one of the methods.

(4 marks)

A manufacturing company regularly holds five items in stock. The company measures material price

inflation by constructing an all items Paasche price index. The table below contains the latest data

regarding the quantity and total cost of materials purchased. Similar information is provided in respect

of 1999.

Purchased 1999 (RM) Purchased 2000 (RM)

1999 (Kg) 2000 (Kg)

A 500 3,500 650 5,200

B 300 4,200 300 4,200

C 100 1,750 120 2,400

D 200 4,500 250 6,250

E 400 4,800 350 4,900

(b) Calculate an all material items Paasche price index for 2000 based upon 1999 and comment on

the result.

(8 marks)

Daily demand for the product varies according to the following probability distribution.

Probability 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.1

(3 marks)

The product costs RM 2 per unit and sells for RM 4.50 per unit. Any items left unsold at the end of the

day are resold back to the supplier for RM 1.25.

(d) Assuming that the retailer regularly buys in 250 units per day, calculate the expected daily profit.

(5 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

11

Model Answer to Question 3

Paasche current period weights

Advantages

Laspeyres – less time consuming and less costly

– comparisons can be made between periods

Paasche – more up to date

Disadvantages

Laspeyres – may be out of date

– overstates price inflation

Paasche – more time consuming and costly

– understates price inflation

p0 values need to be calculated using the total cost and quantities given for 1999

p0 q1 p1q1 p0q1

A 7 650 5,200 4,550

B 14 300 4,200 4,200

C 17.5 120 2,400 2,100

D 22.5 250 6,250 5,625

E 12 350 4,900 4,200

22,950 20,675

(8,205,500) (6,550,000)

∑ p1q1

Paasche Price Index = x 100

∑ p0q1

∑ p1q1 22,950

x 100 = x 100 = 111.0 (125.3)

∑ p0q1 20,675

Expected daily demand = (100 x 0.1) + (200 x 0.6) + (250 x 0.2) + (300 x 0.1)

= 10 + 120 + 50 + 30

= 210 units

Model Answer to Question 3 continued

(d)

Daily Demand Prob Conditional Expected

Profit (RM) Profit (RM)

100 0.1 137.50 13.75

200 0.6 462.50 277.50

250 0.2 625.00 125.00

300 0.1 625.00 62.50

478.75

The explanation in part (a) was done well by many but very poorly by some. A lack of knowledge was

responsible for the poor explanation in most cases. However, in some cases answers were jumbled

up and it became difficult to interpret what was actually being said. Candidates need to express

themselves more clearly. A table headed Laspeyres and Paasche might help some candidates to

focus their thoughts.

The usual mistake was made of not separating out the price and quantities from the total cost figures

given. This resulted in a substantial loss of marks in part (b).

Parts (c) and (d) involved the use of expectation. Whilst most candidates scored well on part (c),

almost all failed to answer part (d) correctly. The main problem appeared to be that candidates

ignored the uncertain demand when calculating the expected daily profit.

HELPFUL HINTS

The calculation of a Laspeyres or Paasche Index is likely to involve initial separation of prices and

quantities (see past examinations).

13

QUESTION 4

The table below shows the amount spent by a company on energy over the past three and a half

years:

Year Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4

Jan - Mar Apr - June July - Sept Oct - Dec

1997 56 70

1998 60 30 50 68

1999 58 32 48 66

2000 56 30 48 64

(a) Plot a graph of the time series data and comment upon the movement within the data.

(4 marks)

(b) Using a suitable model, calculate a four-quarter moving average trend and the quarterly seasonal

variations.

(12 marks)

(c) Using the results from your analysis in part (b), forecast energy costs for the first two quarters of

2001.

(4 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

(a)

Model Answer to Question 4 continued

Y–T Y/T

1997 1

3 56

4 70

216

1998 1 60 426 53.250 6.750 1.127

210

2 30 418 52.250 –22.250 0.574

208

3 50 414 51.750 –1.750 0.966

206

4 68 414 51.750 16.250 1.314

208

1999 1 58 414 51.750 6.250 1.121

206

2 32 410 51.250 –19.250 0.624

204

3 48 406 50.750 –2.750 0.946

202

4 66 402 50.250 15.750 1.313

200

2000 1 56 400 50.000 6.000 1.120

200

2 30 398 49.750 –19.750 0.603

198

3 48

4 64

Additive

Quarter

Year 1 2 3 4

1999 6.250 –19.250 –2.750 15.750

2000 6.000 –19.750

Model Answer to Question 4 continued

Multiplicative

Quarter

Year 1 2 3 4

1999 1.121 0.624 0.946 1.313

2000 1.120 0.603

49.75 – 53.25

= –0.389

9

Additive

2001 1 49.75 + 3(–0.389) + 6.333 = 54.916 (RM5491.6)

2 49.75 + 4(–0.389) + (–20.417) = 27.777 (RM2777.7)

Multiplicative

2001 1 49.75 + 3(–0.389) x 1.123 = 54.559 (RM5455.9)

2 49.75 + 4(–0.389) x 0.6 = 28.916 (RM2891.6)

A time series question on which most candidates scored well. The omission of data for the first two

quarters caused some confusion with a number of candidates assuming that these figures were both

zero. This is clearly wrong. Many failed to offer any comment regarding the movement of data.

HELPFUL HINTS

16

QUESTION 5

A company has recently introduced a revised remuneration scheme for its manual workers. The

management believe that the revised scheme will increase productivity. A random sample of nine

employees was taken just prior to the introduction of the revised scheme and their productivity was

measured.

A second random sample of nine different employees was taken after the introduction of the new

scheme and again their productivity was measured. Both sets of results are shown in the following

table:

Productivity

(Output per week in units)

Old Scheme Revised Scheme

48 49

48 50

52 54

46 44

40 40

50 52

54 52

58 56

52 54

(a) Briefly explain how you would decide whether to use a paired comparison t test or an

independent t test.

(4 marks)

(b) Carry out an appropriate test to ascertain whether the revised scheme has indeed improved

productivity.

(12 marks)

(c) Calculate a 99% confidence interval for the mean output per week per employee under the

revised remuneration schemes.

(4 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

17

Model Answer to Question 5

eg Before and after training

Independent t test

no evidence of pairing

samples independent

eg Production from two different factories

Old New

x y x2 y2 ( x – x )2 ( y – y )2

48 50 2,304 2,500 3.160494 0.012346

52 54 2,704 2,916 4.938272 15.12346

46 44 2,116 1,936 14.2716 37.34568

40 40 1,600 1,600 95.60494 102.2346

50 52 2,500 2,704 0.049383 3.567901

54 52 2,916 2,704 17.82716 3.567901

58 56 3,364 3,136 67.60494 34.67901

52 54 2,704 2,916 4.938272 15.12346

448 451 22,512 22,813 211.5556 212.8889

old

448

mean x= = 49.78

9

new

451

mean y= = 50.11

9

∑( x – x )2 + ∑( y – y )2

Pooled st dev s=

n+m–2

211.5556 + 212.8889

s=

9+9–2

s= 26.5278

s= 26.5278 s = 5.15

Model Answer to Question 5 continued

Null µx = µy

Alt µx < µy

Sig level 5% 0r 1%

degrees of freedom (n + m – 2) = 9 + 9 – 2 = 16

Critical value t = –2.12 or –2.92

x–y

Calculated value t=

1 1

s +

n m

49.78 – 50.11

t=

1 1

5.15 +

9 9

–0.33

t= = –0.1359 alt (-0.1373)

2.4277

The calculated t value is greater than both critical values, there is no evidence to reject the null

hypothesis. The revised scheme does not appear to have improved productivity.

451

(c) mean y= = 50.11

9

∑( y – y )2 212.8889

St dev sd = sd = sd = 5.16

n–1 8

s

Confidence Interval y±t

n

5.16

50.11 ± 3.36

9

50.11 +/ –5.7776

This question was not well done. Most candidates were unable to offer a valid explanation in part (a)

and many chose the wrong test to apply in part (b). At this level candidates are expected to be able to

identify the appropriate test to use for the information given. This type of question is very likely to

appear on future papers.

HELPFUL HINTS

If two samples of individuals are used it is most likely that an independent t test is appropriate.

19

QUESTION 6

Company X employs three salespersons A, B and C. These salespersons visit any new customer

contacts that the company receives. The number of visits made to new customer contacts and the

number of new orders received in the last year, are shown in the table below.

(The new customer contacts are allocated to the salespersons at random and salespersons do not

visit other salesperson’s contacts).

A 400 35

B 200 25

C 400 60

(iii) salesperson C made the initial visit given that no new order was received by any

salesperson.

(9 marks)

The best selling product of Company X is a general high protein animal feed (HPAF) which is sold in

bags with a stated weight of 25 kg. Because of the variability that exists in packaging the product, the

packaging process is set to fill each bag with on average 26.5 kg of the animal feed. (You may

assume that the packaging process follows a normal distribution with a standard deviation of 1.25 kg).

Industry quality regulations require that no more than one in 15 bags contain less than the stated

weight.

(b) Advise the company as to whether they are conforming to industry quality regulations in respect

of the packaging of this product.

(6 marks)

The company has decided to buy a new packaging machine which will reduce the variability relating to

the packaging process. The new packaging process continues to follow a normal distribution but now

with a standard deviation of 400 g.

(c) How much feed on average should each bag now be filled with in order to satisfy the industry

quality regulations?

(5 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

20

Model Answer to Question 6

A B C Total

Order 35 25 60 120

No Order 365 175 340 880

400 200 400 1,000

200

(i) p(B) = = 0.2

1,000

35

(ii) p(order | A) = = 0.0875

400

340

(iii) p(C | no order) = = 0.3864

880

Tree diagram

order or no order

0.4 x 0.9125 = 0.3650

A(0.4) (0.9125) no

o

(0.125) 0.2 x 0.125 = 0.0250

0.2 x 0.875 = 0.1750

B(0.2) (0.875) no

C(0.4) o

(0.15)

0.4 x 0.15 = 0.0600

(0.85) 0.4 x 0.85 = 0.3400

no 1.0000

200

(i) p(B) = = 0.2

1,000

35 .4 x .0875

(ii) p(order | A) = = 0.0875

400 .4

0.34 .4 x .85

(iii) p(Cno order) = = 0.3864

0.88 .3650 + .1750 + .3400

Model Answer to Question 6 continued

x – µ 25 – 26.5

Z= = = –1.2

σ 1.25

area of interest = 1 – 0.885 = 0.115

Since this is greater than 1 in 15 (0.067) so it appears that the packaging process does not

conform to industry quality regulations.

Industry quality regulations - p(x < 25 kg) = 0.067

area of interest = 0.067

area of tables = 0.933

Using tables Z = –1.5

x–µ 25 – µ

Z= –1.5 =

σ 0.4

µ = 25 + (1.5 x 0.4)

µ = 25.6 kg

Very few candidates attempted this question. Those who did, scored badly. Part (a) involved the

application of some basic probability rules, and part (b) required the use of the normal distribution.

These areas are fundamental to this paper and candidates must work to ensure that they understand

and can apply them. By ignoring these areas candidates are reducing their chances of success as

they reduce the choice to 5 from 7 questions.

HELPFUL HINTS

22

QUESTION 7

(4 marks)

A building contractor has been working for 25 days and is part way through a building project. In order

to complete the project he has to start and complete three independent tasks A, B and C which have

to be done in the order ABC. The times taken to complete these tasks follow normal distributions as

detailed below:

(days)

A 14 2

B 7 3

C 10 1

(b) Find the probability that the time taken to complete task A is:

(6 marks)

(c) Find the probability of completing tasks A and B in less than a total of 16 days.

(5 marks)

If the project takes longer than 60 days the contractor will incur a penalty payment.

(d) Find the probability that the contractor will have to pay the penalty payment.

(5 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

23

Model Answer to Question 7

Estimation - confidence intervals

Hypothesis testing

Statistical process control - quality control charts

x–µ 12 – 14

(b) (i) Z= Z= = –1

σ 2

area = 0.841

17 – 14

(ii) Z= = 1.5

2

area = 0.933

(c) mean = 14 + 7 = 21

st dev = 22 + 3 2 = 3.61

16 – 21

= –1.39 (say –1.4)

3.61

area = 0.919

st dev = 2 2 + 3 2 + 12 = 3.74

If remaining 3 tasks take longer than 35 days then the penalty will need to be paid.

35 – 31

= 1.07 (say 1.1)

3.74

24

Examiner’s Report on Question 7

Another question on the normal distribution. This time many more candidates attempted the question

and most scored well. There was some confusion shown in dealing with part (d) with many candidates

forgetting that 25 days had already elapsed.

A number of candidates confused the term ‘uses’ with the term ‘features’ in answering part (a).

25

QUESTION 8

A random sample of 50 retail outlets reported their weekly sales figures for the year 2000 for a

particular product. The data has been set out in the following table:

(000s units)

0 and less than 5 8

5 and less than 10 11

10 and less than 15 14

15 and less than 20 10

20 and less than 25 7

(a) Using the data above, calculate the mean, the variance, the median and a measure of skewness.

Comment upon what the measure of skewness indicates.

(12 marks)

(b) In year 1999 the proportion of all retail outlets reporting weekly sales of 10,000 units or more was

0.57. Test whether there has been a significant increase in the proportion of outlets reporting

weekly sales in year 2000, of 10,000 units or more.

(8 marks)

(Total 20 marks)

26

Model Answer to Question 8

(a)

x f fx fx2

7.5 11 82.5 618.75

12.5 14 175.0 2,187.50

17.5 10 175.0 3,062.50

22.5 7 157.5 3,543.75

50 610.0 9,462.50

∑ fx 610

mean = = 12.2 (12,200 units)

∑f 50

2

∑ fx 2 ∑ fx

variance var = –

∑f ∑f

94,625

var = – (122)2

50

cm n

median = lm + – Fm – 1

fm 2

5 50

= 10 + – 19

14 2

Coefficient of = = = 0.027

Skewness sd 6.357

position of mean and median

(b) Proportion of weeks where demand was 10,000 or more = 31/50 = 0.62

alt hypothesis Π > 0.57

critical values 1.64 and 2.33

calc value Z= Z=

π(1 – π) 0.57(1 – 0.57)

n 50

Z = 0.7141

There is no evidence to reject the null hypothesis. There does not appear to be any difference in

the proportion of outlets when weekly sales were 10,000 units or more.

27

Examiner’s Report on Question 8

A relatively simple question which was generally well done. Many candidates stated the standard

deviation as a measure rather than the variance, and most failed to include units in their answers.

In answering part (b), some candidates attempted to test the mean value or included a combination of

mean and proportion in their test.

HELPFUL HINTS

28

- t-testUploaded byHimanshParmar
- Cost Accounting Level 3/series 2-2009Uploaded byHein Linn Kyaw
- Advanced Business Calculations Level 3/series 4-2009Uploaded byHein Linn Kyaw
- Accounting/Series-2-2011(Code3012)Uploaded byHein Linn Kyaw
- A Statistical Journey: A Taming of the Skew! by D.F. DeMoulin & W.A. KritsonisUploaded byAnonymous sewU7e6
- STA6166_HW5_Ramin_Shamshiri_SolutionUploaded byRaminShamshiri
- Cost Accounting Level 3/Series 2 2008 (Code 3016)Uploaded byHein Linn Kyaw
- 2010 LCCI Level 3 Series 2 Model Answers (Code 3012)Uploaded bymappymappymappy
- Math 533 Week 8 Final ExamUploaded byCaptain Cook
- Advanced Business Calculations/Series-4-2011(Code3003)Uploaded byHein Linn Kyaw
- ASE3003209MAUploaded byHein Linn Kyaw
- Lcci Level3 Solution Past Paper Series 3-10Uploaded bytracyduckk
- Hypothesis Test for Inferential StatisticsUploaded byAlben Bagabaldo
- Assignment 02 (a)Uploaded byrubelkk
- Q.TUploaded bykooolsarim
- 1. Statistical Method and Data Analysis - IntroductionUploaded bygobu269104
- Theory of DecisionUploaded bygreengrass12001
- quiz 3_practice.pdfUploaded byNataliAmiranashvili
- Data Analysis ReportUploaded bySourish Patra
- Sample Exam for Luminita Stevens Intermediate MacroeconomicsUploaded byKevin Shaughnessy
- Math 107_Problem Set 1Uploaded bySmartcool So
- Statistical Analysis and Evaluation (1)Uploaded byJosh Adelpour
- 9465-18351-1-PB.pdfUploaded byDani Romeigo
- Analysis of Capabilities Attributed to the Fraud DiamondUploaded byHariadi Widodo
- Mktg Res ReportUploaded byhershey_santos_1
- StatisticsUploaded byJon West
- Chapter 2Uploaded byVictoria Thompson
- final skittle dataUploaded byapi-272608521
- 601-chap10.pptUploaded byaaaa
- PPart II; Chapter New Four Sampling and Data Analysis ThiniquesUploaded byMengiştu Birhanu

- Evaluating InformationValidityReliabilityAccuracyTriangulationUploaded bydebjani_b
- Bersin StudyUploaded byMatt Brown
- nikita mutter resumeUploaded byapi-273586620
- a security evaluation and testing methodology for open source software embedded information security systemUploaded bykualitatem
- NSOUploaded byv8as7h
- CM Exam 1 Review 2Uploaded byhaneefuddinm
- ( ) D. Dubois, H. Prade (auth.), M. J. Patyra, D. M. Mlynek (eds.)-Fuzzy Logic_ Implementation and Applications-Vieweg+Teubner Verlag (1996)Uploaded bybathaie_mohammad
- Teaching StrategiesUploaded byRaymund Bonde
- Catloge New BookUploaded bypooam_rkt
- women in oceanography upload2Uploaded byapi-256694821
- Agomelatine Versus Other Antidepressive Agents for Major DepressionUploaded byastroglia
- bbs proposalUploaded byChandni Kayastha
- AGM (QC) RecruitmentUploaded bySurendar Kesavan
- Dutch Cultural Tourism PhdUploaded byrobhart
- Assembly Line BalancingUploaded byHarshad_S
- “Dropping the Hyphen? Becoming Latino(a)-American through Racialized Assimilation.”Uploaded byTanya Golash-Boza
- ENG 3 - Academic Writing SkillsUploaded byMadeline Sibulo
- Anything GoesUploaded byEnzo V. Toral
- Hypothesis Testing 1 the Wilcoxon Rank Sum TestUploaded byBalkis
- 2.0 CardiniUploaded byLéo Lacerda
- FinalUploaded byJean Lois Frago Condeza
- ARCP LCAP RESULTS.pdfUploaded byARCPDocs
- The Innovation ParadoxUploaded byInvede
- Ralph H. Abraham, Yoshisuke Ueda - Chaos Avant-Garde_ Memoirs of the Early Days of Chaos Theory (2001, World Scientific Publishing Company).pdfUploaded byAnonymous 80OhIxks
- Management Sciences and Regional Development 7 - Implementation of Balanced Scorecard Performance. Thessaloniki Port Free Zone - SiousiourasUploaded byHhrman Hhuraa
- Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Report 2012Uploaded bytravellerw
- PoliubicuitinacionUploaded byAlex
- Ch 6 Zimmerman - Budgeting SummaryUploaded byMarina Prodan
- Ais EfficiencyUploaded byOsamaNajjar
- The Manhattan Pair Distance Heuristic for the 15-PuzzleUploaded byhahaggerg