### Table 1 Perceived Advantage of PLS Over Covariance-Based SEM

2007

"... In PAGE 9: ... These articles were examined in detail and a list of perceived advantages of PLS over covariance-based SEM was compiled. The ten primary perceived advantages are listed in Table1 in order of their frequency. A critique of these beliefs follows.... ..."

### Table 18. Cox Regression Model. Job Search (time) after finishing CONALEP Covariate** Survey 94 Survey 98 Difference

"... In PAGE 41: ...41 In Table18 , some scenarios were calculated. Given a base category (male, living in the Center region, age, etc.... ..."

### Table 5: Summary of TCE Site Parameter Estimates Covariate Base Case STF1A STF3A

in Leukemia Clusters and TCE Waste Sites in Upstate New York: How Adding Covariates Changes the Story

1999

"... In PAGE 9: ...he G.E. and Monarch sites were confounded by age and occupation. More speci cally, the percentage of residents over 60 years old, the percentage working in jobs classi ed as precision repair and manufacturing, and drinking public water are related to both the site proximity and elevated leukemia counts. Of those variables, only removing the predictor PublicWater from the analysis had little e ect on the estimates in Table5 . Hence we conclude the clustering that was attributed to site proximity might actually be due to clustering of residents in certain occupations and population age.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 13. Number Of Covariance - based SEM Articles Report i ng SEM Statistics

"... In PAGE 44: ... Given that these guidelines are what amount to de facto SEM standards for the IS field, we collected data (in the same research discussed in Section 1) on the extent to which IT research follows these guidelines. A s can be seen from Table13 and Table 14, there are areas of concern and areas where the field is doing remarkably well. What should be said about the reporting of SEM covariance - based statistics in the IS literature? The grayed rows in Table 13 are, in o ur view, both a critical and minimal set of statistics for establishing construct validity and the truth of theoretical models, and so we will concentrate on these rows.... In PAGE 44: ... A s can be seen from Table 13 and Table 14, there are areas of concern and areas where the field is doing remarkably well. What should be said about the reporting of SEM covariance - based statistics in the IS literature? The grayed rows in Table13 are, in o ur view, both a critical and minimal set of statistics for establishing construct validity and the truth of theoretical models, and so we will concentrate on these rows. The lack of reporting of AGFI across all three journals is, frankly, disturbing.... In PAGE 65: ... With an additional path specified over the theoretical model, a third, less constrained model could be easily imagined where both EOU and a variable like SPIR impact IUSE . While there has been little nested model test ing in TAM studies (see Karahanna and Straub [1999] for an example of its employment, however), there have been numerous explorations along this vein in IS research in general (see Table13 ). Nested models allow t he IS researcher to see where the model can be theoretically improved, which is particularly important in TAM research.... ..."

### Table 5: Estimates from the marginal model with covariate-based CSD estimates as o sets.

"... In PAGE 14: ... The initial value (0) was set using a whole population estimate based on a joint log{linear model of independence between all sources, for (0) = 8:100, and with 0 L = log nL for L =G, D, O and S. The results are shown in Table5 . We note that the overall period-prevalence estimate from this model is lower than all those obtained from the joint log{linear models.... ..."

### Table 5: Percentage improvement in log likelihood after MLLR adaptation using the CMU segment clustering (CMU), bottom- up divergence-based clustering (BDIV) and top-down covariance- based clustering (TCOV). Numbers in brackets are the actual num- bers of clusters formed. The three conditions tested are female wide-band (F-WB), male wide-band (M-WB) and male narrow- band (M-NB).

1998

"... In PAGE 3: ... The three conditions tested are female wide-band (F-WB), male wide-band (M-WB) and male narrow- band (M-NB). Table5 compares the three speaker clustering methods in terms of the percentage increase in log likelihood achieved by the sub- sequent MLLR-based mean adaptation with a global MLLR trans- form for each clustered group.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 5: Percentage improvement in log likelihood after MLLR adaptation using the CMU segment clustering (CMU), bottom- up divergence-based clustering (BDIV) and top-down covariance- based clustering (TCOV). Numbers in brackets are the actual num- bers of clusters formed. The three conditions tested are female wide-band (F-WB), male wide-band (M-WB) and male narrow- band (M-NB).

1998

"... In PAGE 3: ... The three conditions tested are female wide-band (F-WB), male wide-band (M-WB) and male narrow- band (M-NB). Table5 compares the three speaker clustering methods in terms of the percentage increase in log likelihood achieved by the sub- sequent MLLR-based mean adaptation with a global MLLR trans- form for each clustered group.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 4: Model based CSDs for selected log{linear models of the ALUS data. ^ N is the estimated total number of patients to the nearest 50. The selected models display either one of the ten best AIC values, one of the ten best CSD distance values or both. Best AIC: model 1; best CSD distance: model 16. Values of \0 quot; are exact, values of \0.00 quot; are rounded. The covariate based log-CSD estimates are shown at the top of the table.

"... In PAGE 10: ... Here, we chose the distance function d = X Q U log ~ CQ ? log ^ CQ 2 : A better choice of distance could be motivated by a study of the distributional prop- erties of the ~ CQ. Table4 displays these distances for selected models. The AIC criterion favours the full independence model while the CSD distance criterion favours the model including all available two-way interactions except G:D.... In PAGE 10: ... Figure 2 shows, the greater speci city of CSD distance as compared with AIC with respect to the estimated total population, in the sense that aberrantly large population estimates are more easily identi ed using CSD distance than AIC. This phenomenon is also apparent in Table4 , (consider models 3, 5, 10 and 13), and should apply to small population values as well; there is of course more leeway in which to err above than below the true population value N. The greater speci city of the CSD distance suggests investigating it as a weight for model averaging as described in Buckland et al.... ..."

### Table 1: Parameters for MIMO scenarios

"... In PAGE 2: ... The Mi- crocell scenario can be considered as a typical beamforming scenario due to that high correlation. Table1 summarizes im- portant parameters of the scenarios. For a detailed description of this MIMO channel model, the reader is referred to [5, 6].... ..."

### Table 1: Increase in log likelihood on dev97 data - xed number of clusters These results clearly show the advantages of adding recom- bination to the strategies. The superior performance of the MLLR-based methods over the covariance-based scheme is also illustrated.

1998

"... In PAGE 3: ... Covariance-based clustering using the Gaussian Divergence and direct MLLR-based clusterering were ap- plied to the segments where the parameters were chosen to produce approximately the same number of clusters as the CMU scheme. The increase in log likelihood of the data from using the clustered MLLR transforms for the di erent schemes is given in Table1 , with the number of... ..."

Cited by 19