In the current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with an update of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version 2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me know if anything seems broken. Allin Cottrell
In the current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with an
update of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version
2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be
grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me
know if anything seems broken.
<div> <div class="gmail_quote">Em 28 de julho de 2012 Allin escreveu:<br><br><span dir="ltr"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote">In the current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with an<br> update of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version<br> 2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be<br> grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me<br> know if anything seems broken.<br> </blockquote> <div> <br>Dear Allin, I made some tests here on my Vista PC and Gretl<br>worked just fine.<br><br>Best regards,<br> </div> </div>Henrique Andrade<br><br> </div>
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012, Henrique Andrade wrote: > Em 28 de julho de 2012 Allin escreveu: > > In the current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with an >> update of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version >> 2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be >> grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me >> know if anything seems broken. >> > > Dear Allin, I made some tests here on my Vista PC and Gretl > worked just fine. Thanks, Henrique, that's good to know. Allin Cottrell
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012, Henrique Andrade wrote:Em 28 de julho de 2012 Allin escreveu: In the current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with anThanks, Henrique, that's good to know. Allin Cottrell _______________________________________________ Gretl-users mailing list Gretl-users-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-usersupdate of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version 2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me know if anything seems broken.Dear Allin, I made some tests here on my Vista PC and Gretl worked just fine.
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Allin,<br><br>
I did not encounter any error yet.<br><br>
Leon<br><br>
Am 30.07.2012 15:04, schrieb Allin Cottrell:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:alpine.LNX.2.01.1207300903470.493@..." type="cite">
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012, Henrique Andrade wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
Em 28 de julho de 2012 Allin escreveu:
In the current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with an
<blockquote type="cite">
update of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version
2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be
grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me
know if anything seems broken.
</blockquote>
Dear Allin, I made some tests here on my Vista PC and Gretl
worked just fine.
</blockquote>
Thanks, Henrique, that's good to know.
Allin Cottrell
_______________________________________________
Gretl-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gretl-users@...">Gretl-users@...</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users">http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users</a>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012, Pindar wrote: > Hi Allin, > > I did not encounter any error yet. Thanks, it sounds like we're OK. We're not actually making use of many features of GTK that are new between versions 2.16 and 2.24, but I gather that the latter contains a fair number of bug-fixes. So unless I hear of any show-stoppers the Windows version of gretl 1.9.10 will ship with GTK 2.24. Allin Cottrell
Em 28 de julho de 2012 Allin escreveu:Henrique Andrade
In the current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with an
update of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version
2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be
grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me
know if anything seems broken.
Dear Allin, I made some tests here on my Vista PC and Gretl
worked just fine.
Best regards,
_______________________________________________ Gretl-users mailing list Gretl-users-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear Allin,<br>
Nothing wrong on Windows 7. I'll keep testing during the weekend<br>
Best,<br>
Artur<br><br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:CAP04dh4bMYsfuxj6E076GXi5GMnzDbNLoHGcEwL2=jgLWunXOQ@..." type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">Em 28 de julho de 2012 Allin escreveu:<br><br><span dir="ltr"></span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">In the
current Windows snapshot I'm experimenting with an<br>
update of the GTK runtime files, from version 2.16 to version<br>
2.24. I've done a little testing and it seems OK, but I'd be<br>
grateful if Windows users could try the snapshot and let me<br>
know if anything seems broken.<br>
</blockquote>
<div>
<br>
Dear Allin, I made some tests here on my Vista PC and Gretl<br>
worked just fine.<br><br>
Best regards,<br>
</div>
</div>
Henrique Andrade<br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________
Gretl-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gretl-users@...">Gretl-users@...</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users">http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users</a>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Hi all! Can someone help me interpret this serial correlation test output? Equation 1: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955 Equation 2: Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869 Equation 3: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999 ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. **** Riservatezza / Confidentiality **** In ottemperanza al D.Lgs. n. 196 del 30/6/2003 in materia di protezione dei dati personali, le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio sono strettamente riservate ed esclusivamente indirizzate al destinatario indicato (oppure alla persona responsabile di rimetterlo al destinatario). Vogliate tener presente che qualsiasi uso, riproduzione o divulgazione di questo messaggio e' vietato. Nel caso in cui aveste ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, vogliate cortesemente avvertire il mittente e distruggere il presente messaggio.
Hi all! Can someone help me interpret this serial correlation test output? Equation 1: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955 Equation 2: Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869 Equation 3: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999 ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. **** Riservatezza / Confidentiality **** In ottemperanza al D.Lgs. n. 196 del 30/6/2003 in materia di protezione dei dati personali, le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio sono strettamente riservate ed esclusivamente indirizzate al destinatario indicato (oppure alla persona responsabile di rimetterlo al destinatario). Vogliate tener presente che qualsiasi uso, riproduzione o divulgazione di questo messaggio e' vietato. Nel caso in cui aveste ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, vogliate cortesemente avvertire il mittente e distruggere il presente messaggio. _______________________________________________ Gretl-users mailing list Gretl-users-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Alessia,<br><br>
in general the test on serial correlation using the Q-statistic
has the null hypothesis of "No significant autocorrelations" (up
to the lags used for the test, which here are 4)<br>
Hence, each p-value indicates that there is no serial correlation
since you cannot reject the null. The critical value is 0,710723
with alpha=0,05 - use GRETL to verify that <br><br>
Cheers<br>
Leon<br><br>
Am 02.08.2012 15:39, schrieb Alessia Via:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:3853_1343914790_501A8326_3853_3309_1_20120802153948.14502empji9yyedc@..." type="cite">
Hi all! Can someone help me interpret this serial correlation test output?
Equation 1:
Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955
Equation 2:
Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869
Equation 3:
Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
**** Riservatezza / Confidentiality ****
In ottemperanza al D.Lgs. n. 196 del 30/6/2003 in materia di protezione dei dati personali, le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio sono strettamente riservate ed esclusivamente indirizzate al destinatario indicato (oppure alla persona responsabile di rimetterlo al destinatario). Vogliate tener presente che qualsiasi uso, riproduzione o divulgazione di questo messaggio e' vietato. Nel caso in cui aveste ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, vogliate cortesemente avvertire il mittente e distruggere il presente messaggio.
_______________________________________________
Gretl-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gretl-users@...">Gretl-users@...</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users">http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users</a>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Thanks!!! ;) Def. Quota Pindar <pindar777@...>: > Hi Alessia, > > in general the test on serial correlation using the Q-statistic has > the null hypothesis of "No significant autocorrelations" (up to the > lags used for the test, which here are 4) > Hence, each p-value indicates that there is no serial correlation > since you cannot reject the null. The critical value is 0,710723 > with alpha=0,05 - use GRETL to verify that
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Pindar wrote: > in general the test on serial correlation using the Q-statistic has the null > hypothesis of "No significant autocorrelations" (up to the lags used for the > test, which here are 4) > Hence, each p-value indicates that there is no serial correlation since you > cannot reject the null. All fine. > The critical value is 0,710723 with alpha=0,05 - use GRETL > to verify that
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Pindar wrote:Ah, I mixed it up. Thanks Allin!in general the test on serial correlation using the Q-statistic has the null hypothesis of "No significant autocorrelations" (up to the lags used for the test, which here are 4) Hence, each p-value indicates that there is no serial correlation since you cannot reject the null.All fine.The critical value is 0,710723 with alpha=0,05 - use GRETL to verify thatThat's actually the value for alpha = 0.95. The 5 percent critical value for chi-square(4) is 9.48773, via gretl's statistical tables.
Allin Cottrell _______________________________________________ Gretl-users mailing list Gretl-users-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 02.08.2012 16:59, schrieb Allin
Cottrell:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:alpine.LNX.2.01.1208021057460.2418@..." type="cite">
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Pindar wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
in general the test on serial correlation using the Q-statistic has the null
hypothesis of "No significant autocorrelations" (up to the lags used for the
test, which here are 4)
Hence, each p-value indicates that there is no serial correlation since you
cannot reject the null.
</blockquote>
All fine.
<blockquote type="cite">
The critical value is 0,710723 with alpha=0,05 - use GRETL
to verify that
</blockquote>
That's actually the value for alpha = 0.95. The 5 percent
critical value for chi-square(4) is 9.48773, via gretl's
statistical tables.
</blockquote>
Ah, I mixed it up. Thanks Allin!<br><blockquote cite="mid:alpine.LNX.2.01.1208021057460.2418@..." type="cite">
Allin Cottrell
_______________________________________________
Gretl-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gretl-users@...">Gretl-users@...</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users">http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users</a>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Thank you!!! So, in this case: Equation 1: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955 Equation 2: Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869 Equation 3: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999 I have to reject the null of non significant correlation for eq. 2?? Thanks again! Def. Quota Pindar <pindar777@...>: > Am 02.08.2012 16:59, schrieb Allin Cottrell: >> On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Pindar wrote: >> >>> in general the test on serial correlation using the Q-statistic >>> has the null >>> hypothesis of "No significant autocorrelations" (up to the lags >>> used for the >>> test, which here are 4) >>> Hence, each p-value indicates that there is no serial correlation since you >>> cannot reject the null. >> All fine. >> >>> The critical value is 0,710723 with alpha=0,05 - use GRETL >>> to verify that
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Alessia Via wrote: > So, in this case: > Equation 1: > Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955 > > Equation 2: > Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869 > > Equation 3: > Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999 > > I have to reject the null of non significant correlation for eq. 2?? No. the p-value of 0.869 means that you are nowhere near rejecting the null hypothesis (which, by the way, states that there is no autocorrelation, not that there is no "significant" autocorrelation). See my correction to Pindar's posting at http://lists.wfu.edu/pipermail/gretl-users/2012-August/007820.html Allin Cottrell
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Alessia Via wrote:Then we have to inform Prof. Enders that in at least the 2. edition of his book "Applied econometric time series" he is wrong by writing this.So, in this case: Equation 1: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955 Equation 2: Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869 Equation 3: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999 I have to reject the null of non significant correlation for eq. 2??No. the p-value of 0.869 means that you are nowhere near rejecting the null hypothesis (which, by the way, states that there is no autocorrelation, not that there is no "significant" autocorrelation).
See my correction to Pindar's posting at http://lists.wfu.edu/pipermail/gretl-users/2012-August/007820.html Allin Cottrell _______________________________________________ Gretl-users mailing list Gretl-users-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 03.08.2012 00:13, schrieb Allin
Cottrell:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:alpine.LFD.2.01.1208021808330.21850 <at> myrtle" type="cite">
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Alessia Via wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
So, in this case:
Equation 1:
Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955
Equation 2:
Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869
Equation 3:
Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999
I have to reject the null of non significant correlation for eq. 2??
</blockquote>
No. the p-value of 0.869 means that you are nowhere near rejecting
the null hypothesis (which, by the way, states that there is no
autocorrelation, not that there is no "significant"
autocorrelation).
</blockquote>
Then we have to inform Prof. Enders that in at least the 2. edition
of his book "Applied econometric time series" he is wrong by writing
this.<br><blockquote cite="mid:alpine.LFD.2.01.1208021808330.21850 <at> myrtle" type="cite">
See my correction to Pindar's posting at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.wfu.edu/pipermail/gretl-users/2012-August/007820.html">http://lists.wfu.edu/pipermail/gretl-users/2012-August/007820.html</a>
Allin Cottrell
_______________________________________________
Gretl-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gretl-users@...">Gretl-users@...</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users">http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users</a>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Enders (3rd ed., p. 70): “Under the null hypothesis that all values of [the sample autocorrelations] = 0, Q is asymptotically chi-squared…If the calculated value of Q exceeds the appropriate value in a chi-squared table, we can reject the null of no significant autocorrelations.”
So Enders actually states 2 versions of the null. At any rate, I’d argue that the word ‘significant’ should apply to the results of the test, not to the hypothesis being tested. Otherwise, the distribution of the statistic under the null would depend on the significance level of the test, right?
I’d score this Allin 1, Enders 0. Now back to what I should be working on…
PS
From: gretl-users-bounces-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org [mailto:gretl-users-bounces-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org]
On Behalf Of Pindar
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 4:18 PM
To: Gretl list
Subject: Re: [Gretl-users] serial correlation test
Am 03.08.2012 00:13, schrieb Allin Cottrell:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Alessia Via wrote:
So, in this case: Equation 1: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955Equation 2: Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869
Equation 3: Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999
I have to reject the null of non significant correlation for eq. 2??
No. the p-value of 0.869 means that you are nowhere near rejecting the null hypothesis (which, by the way, states that there is no autocorrelation, not that there is no "significant" autocorrelation).
Then we have to inform Prof. Enders that in at least the 2. edition of his book "Applied econometric time series" he is wrong by writing this.
See my correction to Pindar's posting at
http://lists.wfu.edu/pipermail/gretl-users/2012-August/007820.html
Allin Cottrell
_______________________________________________ Gretl-users mailing list Gretl-users-npDYnXcwJHngpn9g0Uvcdg@public.gmane.org http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users
<div> <div class="WordSection1"> <p class="MsoNormal"><span>Enders (3rd ed., p. 70): “Under the null hypothesis that all values of [the sample autocorrelations] = 0, Q is asymptotically chi-squared…If the calculated value of Q exceeds the appropriate value in a chi-squared table, we can reject the null of no significant autocorrelations.”<p></p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span><p> </p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span>So Enders actually states 2 versions of the null. At any rate, I’d argue that the word ‘significant’ should apply to the results of the test, not to the hypothesis being tested. Otherwise, the distribution of the statistic under the null would depend on the significance level of the test, right?<p></p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span><p> </p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span>I’d score this Allin 1, Enders 0. Now back to what I should be working on…<p></p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span><p> </p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span>PS <p></p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span><p> </p></span></p> <div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal"><span>From:</span><span> gretl-users-bounces@... [mailto:gretl-users-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Pindar<br>Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 4:18 PM<br>To: Gretl list<br>Subject: Re: [Gretl-users] serial correlation test<p></p></span></p> </div> </div> <p class="MsoNormal"><p> </p></p> <div> <p class="MsoNormal">Am 03.08.2012 00:13, schrieb Allin Cottrell:<p></p></p> </div> <blockquote> On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Alessia Via wrote:<p></p> <p> </p> <blockquote> So, in this case:<p></p> Equation 1:<p></p> Ljung-Box Q' = 0,67263 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,67263) = 0,955<p></p> <p> </p> Equation 2:<p></p> Ljung-Box Q' = 1,25278 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 1,25278) = 0,869<p></p> <p> </p> Equation 3:<p></p> Ljung-Box Q' = 0,0826623 with p-value = P(Chi-quadro(4) > 0,0826623) = 0,999<p></p> <p> </p> I have to reject the null of non significant correlation for eq. 2??<p></p> </blockquote> <p> </p> No. the p-value of 0.869 means that you are nowhere near rejecting <p></p> the null hypothesis (which, by the way, states that there is no <p></p> autocorrelation, not that there is no "significant" <p></p> autocorrelation).<p></p> </blockquote> <p class="MsoNormal">Then we have to inform Prof. Enders that in at least the 2. edition of his book "Applied econometric time series" he is wrong by writing this.<br><br><p></p></p> <p> </p> See my correction to Pindar's posting at<p></p> <p> </p> <a href="http://lists.wfu.edu/pipermail/gretl-users/2012-August/007820.html">http://lists.wfu.edu/pipermail/gretl-users/2012-August/007820.html</a><p></p> <p> </p> Allin Cottrell<p></p> <p> </p> <p> </p> _______________________________________________<p></p> Gretl-users mailing list<p></p> <a href="mailto:Gretl-users@...">Gretl-users@...</a><p></p> <a href="http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users">http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users</a><p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><p> </p></p> </div> </div>
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Summers, Peter wrote: > Enders (3rd ed., p. 70): "Under the null hypothesis that all values of > [the sample autocorrelations] = 0, Q is asymptotically chi-squared...If > the calculated value of Q exceeds the appropriate value in a chi-squared > table, we can reject the null of no significant autocorrelations." That's a nice piece of applied economics jargon. Most applied economists tend to think of the adjectives "non-zero" and "significant" as perfectly interchangeable. Of course, this makes anybody with a decent grasp of statistics cringe, but that doesn't seem to bother economists. -------------------------------------------------- Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti Dipartimento di Economia Università Politecnica delle Marche (formerly known as Università di Ancona) r.lucchetti@... http://www2.econ.univpm.it/servizi/hpp/lucchetti --------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Summers, Peter wrote: > Enders (3rd ed., p. 70): "Under the null hypothesis that all values of > [the sample autocorrelations] = 0, Q is asymptotically chi-squared...If > the calculated value of Q exceeds the appropriate value in a chi-squared > table, we can reject the null of no significant autocorrelations." That's a nice piece of applied economics jargon. Most applied economists tend to think of the adjectives "non-zero" and "significant" as perfectly interchangeable. Of course, this makes anybody with a decent grasp of statistics cringe, but that doesn't seem to bother economists. -------------------------------------------------- Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti Dipartimento di Economia Università Politecnica delle Marche (formerly known as Università di Ancona) r.lucchetti@... http://www2.econ.univpm.it/servizi/hpp/lucchetti --------------------------------------------------
RSS Feed