### Table 3 Chi Square Difference Test

"... In PAGE 21: ... The constrained model sets the correlation between two constructs equal to one; a significantly lower chi-square for the unconstrained model supports the discriminant validity criterion. As shown in Table3 , all constructs exhibit satisfactory discriminant validity. In the second stage of SEM, we compute the structural model, based on the measurement model found in the first stage.... ..."

### Table 9 Mean Squared Difference in Weight Magnitude

1999

"... In PAGE 40: ... Those sections underwent even greater change overall than the connections from one part of the rime to another. Table9 provides summary data concerning different types of weights. The biggest effects were on the weights between rime and cleanup, the weights within the rime, and the self-connections.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 9 Mean Squared Difference in Weight Magnitude

1999

"... In PAGE 40: ... Those sections underwent even greater change overall than the connections from one part of the rime to another. Table9 provides summary data concerning different types of weights. The biggest effects were on the weights between rime and cleanup, the weights within the rime, and the self-connections.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 5. The differences between class-specific detection outputs (non-plant data)a

2005

Cited by 5

### Table 6. The differences between class-specific detection outputs (plant data)a

2005

Cited by 5

### TABLE 2. MSE of GLM and ANN models using entire and validation data sets with and without weight decay for nirS, nirK, dsrAB1, and dsrAB2

2003

### Table 4 Adjusted R-squared for different models and estimators

2005

"... In PAGE 25: ...25 predictors which maximize adjusted R-squared among additive models with bivariate interaction terms with 16 degrees of freedom each: humidity (hmdt), inversion base height (ibtp), and calendar day (day). Note that this additive model with bivariate interaction terms has roughly the same adjusted R-squared as the additive model with all nine predictors and four degrees of freedom for each component; see Table4 . Hence, when using these three predictors, we expect substantial information in the inter- action terms.... In PAGE 25: ...240. The lower half of Table4 demonstrates that the penalized estimator is vastly better than the additive one in terms of adjusted R-squared, and slightly better than the local linear estimator. Next, we orthogonally decompose the local linear and the penalized es- timator into intercept, additive components, bivariate interactions and re- mainder.... ..."

### Table 1: Sum Square Difference between warped and actual surfaces.

2005

Cited by 1

### Table 7. Mean square differences between the reference method

"... In PAGE 7: ... In this case, contrary to the lack ence effects. of precision due to field heterogeneity or genotype- The msd values are in Table7 . With Model (1)9, environment interaction, interference can hardly be controlled just by increasing the numbers of replications, Table 7.... ..."