7-Motivation_of_Aggregation_18-54
Autodesk Nastran 2022 用户手册说明书

MPA, MPI (design/logo), MPX (design/logo), MPX, Mudbox, Navisworks, ObjectARX, ObjectDBX, Opticore, Pixlr, Pixlr-o-matic, Productstream,
Publisher 360, RasterDWG, RealDWG, ReCap, ReCap 360, Remote, Revit LT, Revit, RiverCAD, Robot, Scaleform, Showcase, Showcase 360,
TrueConvert, DWG TrueView, DWGX, DXF, Ecotect, Ember, ESTmep, Evolver, FABmep, Face Robot, FBX, Fempro, Fire, Flame, Flare, Flint,
ForceEffect, FormIt, Freewheel, Fusion 360, Glue, Green Building Studio, Heidi, Homestyler, HumanIK, i-drop, ImageModeler, Incinerator, Inferno,
Autodesk Nastran 2022
Reference Manual
Nastran Solver Reference Manual
产业经济学_浙江财经大学2中国大学mooc课后章节答案期末考试题库2023年

产业经济学_浙江财经大学2中国大学mooc课后章节答案期末考试题库2023年1.( )学派被称为“结构主义学派”。
答案:哈佛学派2.下列说法中对SCP的认识正确的一项( )答案:市场绩效优劣的评价主要包括产业资源配置效率、利润率水平、生产效率等方面3.度量企业规模经济的指标是()答案:AC/MC4.苹果公司不仅生产智能手机,还生产PC机和平板电脑,这在一定程度上可以获得()答案:范围经济5.请根据题干信息,回答5-8题。
考虑一个计算机市场,其中各企业及销售额具体如下:企业销售额(万元)A计算机公司1000B计算机公司800C计算机公司600D计算机公司400E计算机公司300F计算机公司200G计算机公司150H计算机公司100I计算机公司50J计算机公司 1则前4位企业的绝对集中度指数为()答案:77.8%6.根据第5题提供的相关信息,计算该市场的赫芬达尔指数(HHI)为()答案:0.17937.根据第5题提供的相关信息,如果A计算机公司与B计算机公司合并,各企业的销售额保持不变,计算新市场的赫芬达尔指数(HHI)为()答案:0.32078.根据第5题提供的相关信息,可了解HHI指数的优势在于()答案:HHI对规模最大的前几个企业的市场份额变化反映特别敏感9.现有企业通过拥有先进技术导致单位产品投入更少形成的进入壁垒是()答案:绝对成本优势壁垒10.在具有网络效应的产品市场中,为了鼓励竞争企业进入,政府应该着力降低网络效应壁垒,其主要做法是()答案:推动网络间互联互通11.掠夺性定价的特征有( )答案:价格一般定在低于平均成本之下12.以价格为决策变量,探讨同质产品双寡头竞争的市场博弈模型是()答案:伯川德模型13.联想收购IBM公司的PC部门属于()答案:横向并购14.企业采取下列哪项并购行为,主要目的是获得规模经济()答案:横向并购15.请根据题干信息,回答15-17题。
考虑竞争条件下行业的价格等于边际成本。
20140219_Analytical_Procedures_and_Methods_Validation_for_Drugs_and_Biologics

Analytical Procedures and Methods Validation for Drugsand BiologicsDRAFT GUIDANCEThis guidance document is being distributed for comment purposes only. Comments and suggestions regarding this draft document should be submitted within 90 days of publication in the Federal Register of the notice announcing the availability of the draft guidance. Submit electronic comments to . Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket number listed in the notice of availability that publishes in the Federal Registe r.For questions regarding this draft document contact (CDER) Lucinda Buhse 314-539-2134, or (CBER) Office of Communication, Outreach and Development at 800-835-4709 or 301-827-1800.U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesFood and Drug AdministrationCenter for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)February 2014CMCAnalytical Procedures and Methods Validation for Drugsand BiologicsAdditional copies are available from:Office of CommunicationsDivision of Drug Information, WO51, Room 2201Center for Drug Evaluation and ResearchFood and Drug Administration10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993Phone: 301-796-3400; Fax: 301-847-8714druginfo@/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htmand/orOffice of Communication, Outreach andDevelopment, HFM-40Center for Biologics Evaluation and ResearchFood and Drug Administration1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448ocod@/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm(Tel) 800-835-4709 or 301-827-1800U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesFood and Drug AdministrationCenter for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)Febr uary 2014CMCTABLE OF CONTENTSI.INTRODUCTION (1)II.BACKGROUND (2)III.ANALYTICAL METHODS DEVELOPMENT (3)IV.CONTENT OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES (3)A.Principle/Scope (4)B.Apparatus/Equipment (4)C.Operating Parameters (4)D.Reagents/Standards (4)E.Sample Preparation (4)F.Standards Control Solution Preparation (5)G.Procedure (5)H.System Suitability (5)I.Calculations (5)J.Data Reporting (5)V.REFERENCE STANDARDS AND MATERIALS (6)VI.ANALYTICAL METHOD VALIDATION FOR NDA, ANDAs, BLAs, AND DMFs (6)A.Noncompendial Analytical Procedures (6)B.Validation Characteristics (7)pendial Analytical Procedures (8)VII.STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MODELS (8)A.Statistics (8)B.Models (8)VIII.LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES (9)A.Revalidation (9)B.Analytical Method Comparability Studies (10)1.Alternative Analytical Procedures (10)2.Analytical Methods Transfer Studies (11)C.Reporting Postmarketing Changes to an Approved NDA, ANDA, or BLA (11)IX.FDA METHODS VERIFICATION (12)X.REFERENCES (12)Guidance for Industry11Analytical Procedures and Methods Validation for Drugs and2Biologics345This draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) current 6thinking on this topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to 7bind FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if the approach satisfies the requirements of 8the applicable statutes and regulations. If you want to discuss an alternative approach, contact the FDA9staff responsible for implementing this guidance. If you cannot identify the appropriate FDA staff, call 10the appropriate number listed on the title page of this guidance.11121314I. INTRODUCTION1516This revised draft guidance supersedes the 2000 draft guidance for industry on Analytical17Procedures and Methods Validation2,3 and, when finalized, will also replace the 1987 FDA18guidance for industry on Submitting Samples and Analytical Data for Methods Validation. It19provides recommendations on how you, the applicant, can submit analytical procedures4 and20methods validation data to support the documentation of the identity, strength, quality, purity,21and potency of drug substances and drug products.5It will help you assemble information and 22present data to support your analytical methodologies. The recommendations apply to drug23substances and drug products covered in new drug applications (NDAs), abbreviated new drug 24applications (ANDAs), biologics license applications (BLAs), and supplements to these25applications. The principles in this revised draft guidance also apply to drug substances and drug 26products covered in Type II drug master files (DMFs).2728This revised draft guidance complements the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) 29guidance Q2(R1)Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology(Q2(R1)) for30developing and validating analytical methods.3132This revised draft guidance does not address investigational new drug application (IND) methods 33validation, but sponsors preparing INDs should consider the recommendations in this guidance.34For INDs, sufficient information is required at each phase of an investigation to ensure proper35identity, quality, purity, strength, and/or potency. The amount of information on analytical36procedures and methods validation will vary with the phase of the investigation.6 For general371 This guidance has been prepared by the Office of Pharmaceutical Science, in the Center for Drug Evaluation andResearch (CDER) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) at the Food and DrugAdministration.2 Sample submission is described in section IX, FDA Methods Verification.3 We update guidances periodically. To make sure you have the most recent version of a guidance, check the FDADrugs guidance Web page at/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm.4Analytical procedure is interchangeable with a method or test procedure.5The terms drug substance and drug product, as used in this guidance, refer to human drugs and biologics.6 See 21 CFR 312.23(a)(7).guidance on analytical procedures and methods validation information to be submitted for phase 38one studies, sponsors should refer to the FDA guidance for industry on Content and Format of39Investigational New Drug Applications (INDs) for Phase 1 Studies of Drugs, Including40Well-Characterized, Therapeutic, Biotechnology-Derived Products. General considerations for 41analytical procedures and method validation (e.g., bioassay) before conduct of phase three42studies are discussed in the FDA guidance for industry on IND Meetings for Human Drugs and 43Biologics, Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls Information.4445This revised draft guidance does not address specific method validation recommendations for46biological and immunochemical assays for characterization and quality control of many drug47substances and drug products. For example, some bioassays are based on animal challenge48models, and immunogenicity assessments or other immunoassays have unique features that49should be considered during development and validation.5051In addition, the need for revalidation of existing analytical methods may need to be considered 52when the manufacturing process changes during the product’s life cycle. For questions on53appropriate validation approaches for analytical procedures or submission of information not54addressed in this guidance, you should consult with the appropriate FDA product quality review 55staff.5657If you choose a different approach than those recommended in this revised draft guidance, we58encourage you to discuss the matter with the appropriate FDA product quality review staff before 59you submit your application.6061FDA’s guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable62responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe the Agency’s current thinking on a topic and should 63be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are64cited. The use of the word should in Agency guidances means that something is suggested or65recommended, but not required.666768II.BACKGROUND6970Each NDA and ANDA must include the analytical procedures necessary to ensure the identity, 71strength, quality, purity, and potency of the drug substance and drug product.7 Each BLA must 72include a full description of the manufacturing methods, including analytical procedures that73demonstrate the manufactured product meets prescribed standards of identity, quality, safety,74purity, and potency.8 Data must be available to establish that the analytical procedures used in 75testing meet proper standards of accuracy and reliability and are suitable for their intended76purpose.9 For BLAs and their supplements, the analytical procedures and their validation are77submitted as part of license applications or supplements and are evaluated by FDA quality78review groups.79807 See 21 CFR 314.50(d)(1) and 314.94(a)(9)(i).8 See 21 CFR 601.2(a) and 601.2(c).9 See 21 CFR 211.165(e) and 211.194(a)(2).Analytical procedures and validation data should be submitted in the corresponding sections of 81the application in the ICH M2 eCTD: Electronic Common Technical Document Specification.108283When an analytical procedure is approved/licensed as part of the NDA, ANDA, or BLA, it84becomes the FDA approved analytical procedure for the approved product. This analytical85procedure may originate from FDA recognized sources (e.g., a compendial procedure from the 86United States Pharmacopeia/National Formulary (USP/NF)) or a validated procedure you87submitted that was determined to be acceptable by FDA. To apply an analytical method to a88different product, appropriate validation studies with the matrix of the new product should be89considered.909192III.ANALYTICAL METHODS DEVELOPMENT9394An analytical procedure is developed to test a defined characteristic of the drug substance or95drug product against established acceptance criteria for that characteristic. Early in the96development of a new analytical procedure, the choice of analytical instrumentation and97methodology should be selected based on the intended purpose and scope of the analytical98method. Parameters that may be evaluated during method development are specificity, linearity, 99limits of detection (LOD) and quantitation limits (LOQ), range, accuracy, and precision.100101During early stages of method development, the robustness of methods should be evaluated102because this characteristic can help you decide which method you will submit for approval.103Analytical procedures in the early stages of development are initially developed based on a104combination of mechanistic understanding of the basic methodology and prior experience.105Experimental data from early procedures can be used to guide further development. You should 106submit development data within the method validation section if they support the validation of 107the method.108109To fully understand the effect of changes in method parameters on an analytical procedure, you 110should adopt a systematic approach for method robustness study (e.g., a design of experiments 111with method parameters). You should begin with an initial risk assessment and follow with112multivariate experiments. Such approaches allow you to understand factorial parameter effects 113on method performance. Evaluation of a method’s performance may include analyses of114samples obtained from in-process manufacturing stages to the finished product. Knowledge115gained during these studies on the sources of method variation can help you assess the method 116performance.117118119IV.CONTENT OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES120121You should describe analytical procedures in sufficient detail to allow a competent analyst to 122reproduce the necessary conditions and obtain results within the proposed acceptance criteria. 123You should also describe aspects of the analytical procedures that require special attention. An 124analytical procedure may be referenced from FDA recognized sources (e.g., USP/NF,12510 See sections 3.2.S.4 Control of Drug Substance, 3.2.P.4 Control of Excipients, and 3.2.P.5 Control of DrugProduct.Association of Analytical Communities (AOAC) International)11 if the referenced analytical126procedure is not modified beyond what is allowed in the published method. You should provide 127in detail the procedures from other published sources. The following is a list of essential128information you should include for an analytical procedure:129130A.Principle/Scope131132A description of the basic principles of the analytical test/technology (separation, detection, etc.); 133target analyte(s) and sample(s) type (e.g., drug substance, drug product, impurities or compounds 134in biological fluids, etc.).135136B.Apparatus/Equipment137138All required qualified equipment and components (e.g., instrument type, detector, column type, 139dimensions, and alternative column, filter type, etc.).140141C.Operating Parameters142143Qualified optimal settings and ranges (allowed adjustments) critical to the analysis (e.g., flow144rate, components temperatures, run time, detector settings, gradient, head space sampler). A145drawing with experimental configuration and integration parameters may be used, as applicable. 146147D.Reagents/Standards148149The following should be listed:150151•Grade of chemical (e.g., USP/NF, American Chemical Society, High152Performance or Pressure Liquid Chromatography, or Gas153Chromatography and preservative free).154•Source (e.g., USP reference standard or qualified in-house reference material). 155•State (e.g., dried, undried, etc.) and concentration.156•Standard potencies (purity correction factors).157•Storage controls.158•Directions for safe use (as per current Safety Data Sheet).159•Validated or useable shelf life.160161New batches of biological reagents, such as monoclonal antibodies, polyclonal antisera, or cells, 162may need extensive qualification procedures included as part of the analytical procedure.163164E.Sample Preparation165166Procedures (e.g., extraction method, dilution or concentration, desalting procedures and mixing 167by sonication, shaking or sonication time, etc.) for the preparations for individual sample tests. 168A single preparation for qualitative and replicate preparations for quantitative tests with16911 See 21 CFR 211.194(a)(2).appropriate units of concentrations for working solutions (e.g., µg/ml or mg/ml) and information 170on stability of solutions and storage conditions.171172F.Standards Control Solution Preparation173174Procedures for the preparation and use of all standard and control solutions with appropriate175units of concentration and information on stability of standards and storage conditions,176including calibration standards, internal standards, system suitability standards, etc.177178G.Procedure179180A step-by-step description of the method (e.g., equilibration times, and scan/injection sequence 181with blanks, placeboes, samples, controls, sensitivity solution (for impurity method) and182standards to maintain validity of the system suitability during the span of analysis) and allowable 183operating ranges and adjustments if applicable.184185H.System Suitability186187Confirmatory test(s) procedures and parameters to ensure that the system (equipment,188electronics, and analytical operations and controls to be analyzed) will function correctly as an 189integrated system at the time of use. The system suitability acceptance criteria applied to190standards and controls, such as peak tailing, precision and resolution acceptance criteria, may be 191required as applicable. For system suitability of chromatographic systems, refer to CDER192reviewer guidance on Validation of Chromatographic Methods and USP General Chapter <621> 193Chromatography.194195I.Calculations196197The integration method and representative calculation formulas for data analysis (standards,198controls, samples) for tests based on label claim and specification (e.g., assay, specified and199unspecified impurities and relative response factors). This includes a description of any200mathematical transformations or formulas used in data analysis, along with a scientific201justification for any correction factors used.202203J.Data Reporting204205A presentation of numeric data that is consistent with instrumental capabilities and acceptance 206criteria. The method should indicate what format to use to report results (e.g., percentage label 207claim, weight/weight, and weight/volume etc.) with the specific number of significant figures 208needed. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E29 describes a standard209practice for using significant digits in test data to determine conformance with specifications. For 210chromatographic methods, you should include retention times (RTs) for identification with211reference standard comparison basis, relative retention times (RRTs) (known and unknown212impurities) acceptable ranges and sample results reporting criteria.213214215V.REFERENCE STANDARDS AND MATERIALS216217Primary and secondary reference standards and materials are defined and discussed in the218following ICH guidances: Q6A Specifications: Test Procedures and Acceptance Criteria for 219New Drug Substances and New Drug Products: Chemical Substances (ICH Q6A), Q6B220Specifications: Test Procedures and Acceptance Criteria for Biotechnological/Biological221Products, and Q7 Good Manufacturing Practice Guidance for Active Pharmaceutical222Ingredients. For all standards, you should ensure the suitability for use. Reference standards for 223drug substances are particularly critical in validating specificity for an identity test. You should 224strictly follow storage, usage conditions, and handling instructions for reference standards to225avoid added impurities and inaccurate analysis. For biological products, you should include226information supporting any reference standards and materials that you intend to use in the BLA 227and in subsequent annual reports for subsequent reference standard qualifications. Information 228supporting reference standards and materials include qualification test protocols, reports, and 229certificates of analysis (including stability protocols and relevant known impurity profile230information, as applicable).231232Reference standards can often be obtained from USP and may also be available through the233European Pharmacopoeia, Japanese Pharmacopoeia, World Health Organization, or National 234Institute of Standards and Technology. Reference standards for a number of biological products 235are also available from CBER. For certain biological products marketed in the U.S., reference 236standards authorized by CBER must be used before the product can be released to the market.12 237Reference materials from other sources should be characterized by procedures including routine 238and beyond routine release testing as described in ICH Q6A. You should consider orthogonal 239methods. Additional testing could include attributes to determine the suitability of the reference 240material not necessarily captured by the drug substance or product release tests (e.g., more241extensive structural identity and orthogonal techniques for purity and impurities, biological242activity).243244For biological reference standards and materials, we recommend that you follow a two-tiered 245approach when qualifying new reference standards to help prevent drift in the quality attributes 246and provide a long-term link to clinical trial material. A two-tiered approach involves a247comparison of each new working reference standard with a primary reference standard so that it 248is linked to clinical trial material and the current manufacturing process.249250251VI.ANALYTICAL METHOD VALIDATION FOR NDA, ANDAs, BLAs, AND 252DMFs253254A.Noncompendial Analytical Procedures255256Analytical method validation is the process of demonstrating that an analytical procedure is257suitable for its intended purpose. The methodology and objective of the analytical procedures 258should be clearly defined and understood before initiating validation studies. This understanding 25912 See 21 CFR 610.20.is obtained from scientifically-based method development and optimization studies. Validation 260data must be generated under an protocol approved by the sponsor following current good261manufacturing practices with the description of methodology of each characteristic test and262predetermined and justified acceptance criteria, using qualified instrumentation operated under 263current good manufacturing practices conditions.13 Protocols for both drug substance and264product analytes or mixture of analytes in respective matrices should be developed and executed. 265266ICH Q2(R1) is considered the primary reference for recommendations and definitions on267validation characteristics for analytical procedures. The FDA Reviewer Guidance: Validation of 268Chromatographic Methods is available as well.269270B.Validation Characteristics271272Although not all of the validation characteristics are applicable for all types of tests, typical273validation characteristics are:274275•Specificity276•Linearity277•Accuracy278•Precision (repeatability, intermediate precision, and reproducibility)279•Range280•Quantitation limit281•Detection limit282283If a procedure is a validated quantitative analytical procedure that can detect changes in a quality 284attribute(s) of the drug substance and drug product during storage, it is considered a stability285indicating assay. To demonstrate specificity of a stability-indicating assay, a combination of286challenges should be performed. Some challenges include the use of samples spiked with target 287analytes and all known interferences; samples that have undergone various laboratory stress288conditions; and actual product samples (produced by the final manufacturing process) that are289either aged or have been stored under accelerated temperature and humidity conditions.290291As the holder of the NDA, ANDA, or BLA, you must:14 (1) submit the data used to establish292that the analytical procedures used in testing meet proper standards of accuracy and reliability, 293and (2) notify the FDA about each change in each condition established in an approved294application beyond the variations already provided for in the application, including changes to 295analytical procedures and other established controls.296297The submitted data should include the results from the robustness evaluation of the method,298which is typically conducted during method development or as part of a planned validation299study.1530013 See 21 CFR 211.165(e); 21 CFR 314.50 (d), and for biologics see 21 CFR 601.2(a), 601.2(c), and 601.12(a).14 For drugs see 21 CFR 314.50 (d), 314.70(d), and for biologics see 21 CFR 601.2(a), 601.2(c), and 601.12(a). For aBLA, as discussed below, you must obtain prior approval from FDA before implementing a change in analyticalmethods if those methods are specified in FDA regulations15 See section III and ICH Q2(R1).pendial Analytical Procedures302303The suitability of an analytical procedure (e.g., USP/NF, the AOAC International Book of304Methods, or other recognized standard references) should be verified under actual conditions of 305use.16 Compendial general chapters, which are complex and mention multiple steps and/or306address multiple techniques, should be rationalized for the intended use and verified. Information 307to demonstrate that USP/NF analytical procedures are suitable for the drug product or drug308substance should be included in the submission and generated under a verification protocol.309310The verification protocol should include, but is not limited to: (1) compendial methodology to 311be verified with predetermined acceptance criteria, and (2) details of the methodology (e.g.,312suitability of reagent(s), equipment, component(s), chromatographic conditions, column, detector 313type(s), sensitivity of detector signal response, system suitability, sample preparation and314stability). The procedure and extent of verification should dictate which validation characteristic 315tests should be included in the protocol (e.g., specificity, LOD, LOQ, precision, accuracy, etc.). 316Considerations that may influence what characteristic tests should be in the protocol may depend 317on situations such as whether specification limits are set tighter than compendial acceptance318criteria, or RT or RRT profiles are changing in chromatographic methods because of the319synthetic route of drug substance or differences in manufacturing process or matrix of drug320product. Robustness studies of compendial assays do not need to be included, if methods are 321followed without deviations.322323324VII.STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MODELS325326A.Statistics327328Statistical analysis of validation data can be used to evaluate validation characteristics against 329predetermined acceptance criteria. All statistical procedures and parameters used in the analysis 330of the data should be based on sound principles and appropriate for the intended evaluation.331Reportable statistics of linear regression analysis R (correlation coefficient), R square332(coefficient of determination), slope, least square, analysis of variance (ANOVA), confidence 333intervals, etc., should be provided with justification.For information on statistical techniques 334used in making comparisons, as well as other general information on the interpretation and335treatment of analytical data, appropriate literature or texts should be consulted.17336337B.Models338339Some analytical methods might use chemometric and/or multivariate models. When developing 340these models, you should include a statistically adequate number and range of samples for model 341development and comparable samples for model validation. Suitable software should be used for 342data analysis. Model parameters should be deliberately varied to test model robustness.34334416 See 21 CFR 211.194(a)(2) and USP General Chapter <1226> Verification of Compendial Procedures.17 See References section for examples including USP <1010> Analytical Data – Interpretation and Treatment.。
数据的整编和分析

常用统计分析方法——SPSS应用General Method of Statistical AnalysisSPSS Application杜志渊编著前言《统计学》是一门计算科学,是自然科学在社会经济各领域中的应用学科,是许多学科的高校在校本科生的必修课程。
在统计学原理的学习和统计方法的实际应用中,经常需要进行大量的计算。
因此,统计分析软件问世使强大的计算机功能得到充分发挥,不仅能够减轻计算工作量,计算结果非常准确,而且还节省了统计分析时间。
因此,应用统计分析软件进行数据处理已经成为社会学家和科学工作者必不可少的工作内容。
为了使高校的学生能够更好的适应社会的发展和需求,学习和使用统计软件已经成为当前管理学、社会学、自然科学、生物医学、工程学、农业科学、运筹学等学科的本科生或研究生所面临的普遍问题。
为了使大学生和专业人员在掌握统计学原理的基础上能够正确地运用计算机做各种统计分析,掌握统计分析软件的操作是非常有必要的。
现将常用的SPSS统计分析软件处理数据和分析数据的基本方法编辑成册,供高校学生及对统计分析软件有兴趣的人员学习和参考,希望能够对学习者有所帮助。
本书以统计学原理为理论基础,以高等学校本科生学习的常用的统计方法为主要内容,重点介绍这些统计分析方法的SPSS 软件的应用。
为了便于理解,每一种方法结合一个例题解释SPSS软件的操作步骤和方法,并且对统计分析的输出结果进行相应的解释和分析。
同时也结合工业、农业、商业、医疗卫生、文化教育等实际问题,力求使学生对统计分析方法的应用有更深刻的认识和理解,以提高学生学习的兴趣和主动性。
另外,为了方便学习者的查询,将常用统计量的数学表达式作为附录1,SPSS 中所用的主要函数释义作为附录2,希望对学习者能够的所帮助。
编者目录第一章数据文件的建立及基本统计描述 (1)§1.1 SPSS的启动及数据库的建立 (1)§1.1.2 SPSS简介 (1)§1.1.2 启动SPSS软件包 (3)§1.1.3 数据文件的建立 (5)§1.2 数据的编辑与整理 (8)§1.2.1 数据窗口菜单栏功能操作 (8)§1.2.2 Date数据功能 (9)§1.2.3 Transform 变换及转换功能 (10)§1.2.4 数据的编辑 (12)§1.2.5 SPSS对变量的编辑 (20)§1.3 基本统计描述 (26)§1.3.1 描述统计分析过程 (26)§1.3.2 频数分析 (28)§1.4 交叉列联表分析 (44)§1.4.1 交叉列联表的形成 (44)§1.4.2 两变量关联性检验(Chi-square Test卡方检验) (47)第二章均值比较检验与方差分析 (54)§2.1 单个总体的t 检验(One-Sample T Test)分析 (55)§2.2 两个总体的t 检验 (58)§2.2.1 两个独立样本的t检验(Independent-sample T Test) (58)§2.2.2 两个有联系总体间的均值比较(Paired-Sample T Test) (61)§2.3 单因素方差分析 (64)§2.4 双因素方差(Univariate)分析过程 (69)第三章相关分析与回归模型的建立与分析 (80)§3.1 相关分析 (80)§3.1.1 简单相关分析 (81)§3.1.1.1 散点图 (81)§3.1.1.2 简单相关分析操作 (83)§3.1.2 偏相关分析 (85)§3.2 线性回归分析 (89)§3.3 曲线估计 (100)第四章时间序列分析 (111)§4.1 实验准备工作 (111)§4.1.1 根据时间数据定义时间序列 (111)§4.1.2 绘制时间序列线图和自相关图 (112)§4.2 季节变动分析 (118)§4.2.1 季节分析方法 (118)§4.2.2 进行季节调整 (121)第五章非参数检验 (125)§5.1 Chi-Square Test 卡方检验 (127)§5.2 一个样本的K-S检验 (131)§5.3 两个独立样本的检验(Test for Two Independent Sample) (135)§5.4 两个有联系样本检验(Test for Two related samples) (138)§5.6 多个样本的非参数检验(K Samples Test) (141)§5.6 游程检验(Runs Test) (148)附录1 部分常用统计量公式 (154)§6.1 数据的基本统计特征描述 (154)§6.2 总体均值检验统计量 (156)§6.3 方差分析中的统计量 (158)§6.4 回归分析模型 (161)§6.5 非参数检验 (168)附录2 SPSS函数 (175)第一章数据文件的建立及基本统计描述在社会各项经济活动和科学研究过程中,经常获得许多数据,而这些数据中包含着大量有用的信息。
某财经学院《发布证券研究报告业务》考试试卷(174)

某财经学院《发布证券研究报告业务》课程试卷(含答案)__________学年第___学期考试类型:(闭卷)考试考试时间:90 分钟年级专业_____________学号_____________ 姓名_____________1、概念题(215分,每题5分)1. 下列关于市值回报增长比(PEG)的说法,正确的有()。
Ⅰ.市值回报增长比即市盈率对公司利润增长率的倍数Ⅱ.当PEG大于1时,表明市场赋予这只股票的估值可以充分反映其未来业绩的成长性Ⅲ.通常,成长型股票的PEG都会高于1,甚至在2以上,投资者愿意给予其高估值Ⅳ.通常,价值型股票的PEG都会低于1,以反映低业绩增长的预期答案:D解析:空2. 消除自相关影响的方法包括()。
Ⅰ.岭回归法Ⅱ.一阶差分法Ⅲ.德宾两步法Ⅳ.增加样本容量答案:C解析:空3. 运用重置成本法进行资产评估的优点有()。
Ⅰ.比较充分地考虑了资产的损耗,评估结果更加公平合理Ⅱ.有利于单项资产和特定用途资产的评估Ⅲ.在不易计算资产未来收益或难以取得市场参照物条件下可广泛地应用Ⅳ.有利于企业资产保值答案:D解析:空4. 某人将1000元存入银行,若利率为7%,下列结论正确的有()。
[2017年4月真题]Ⅰ.若按单利计息,3年后利息总额为210元Ⅱ.若按复利计息,3年后利息总额为1225.04元Ⅲ.若按单利计息,5年后其账户的余额为1350元Ⅳ.若按复利计息,5年后其账户的余额为1412.22元答案:A解析:空5. 当期收益率的缺点表现为()。
Ⅰ.零息债券无法计算当期收益Ⅱ.不能用于比较期限和发行人均较为接近的债券Ⅲ.一般不单独用于评价不同期限附息债券的优劣Ⅳ.计算方法较为复杂答案:B解析:空6. 三角形态是属于持续整理形态的一类形态,三角形主要分为()。
Ⅰ.对称三角形Ⅱ.等边三角形Ⅲ.上升三角形Ⅳ.下降三角形答案:C解析:空7. 从股东的角度看,在公司全部资本利润率超过因借款而支付的利息率时,()。
SPC手册中文版

质量管理/技术统计9.设备和过程能力科技成就生活之美第3版 20##07月01日第2版 1991年07月29日第1版 1990年04月11日本手册给出能力和性能指标的最低要求,版本日期出版时有效。
如有冲突,QSP0402的要求具有约束力和优先于本手册。
设备和过程能力目录页码1. 介绍 ........................................................................................ (4)2. 术语......................................................................................... (4)3. 设备和过程能力研究流程图 (6)4. 设备能力研究......................................................................................... . (7)4.1 一台设备详细能力研究 (8)4.2 数据评估 ........................................................................................ .. (9)短期稳定性研究 (9)标准方法......................................................................................... . (9)计算程序手册 (11)4.3对设备能力不足采取的措施 (12)5. 过程能力研究......................................................................................... . (14)5.1 程序......................................................................................... .. (14)5.2 数据评估〔标准方法〕 (14)过程稳定性研究〔变异分析和F测试〕 (14)统计分布研究 (15)过程能力统计指数 (15)5.3 数据评估评估〔计算程序手册〕 (16)过程稳定性研究 ............................................................................16统计分布研究 (16)过程能力统计指数 (16)6. 统计指数解释 (18)6.1 统计指数和部分不符合的联系 (18)6.2 样本大小的作用 ........................................................................................ (19)6.3 测量系统的作用 (19)7. 质量特性统计指数 (20)8. 性能指数统计报告 (20)9. 统计指数计算方法 (21)9.1 方法M1 ........................................................................................ . (21)9.2 方法M2 ........................................................................................ . (22)9.3 方法 M3 <围方法>.........................................................................................229.4 方法 M4 <分位数方法> (23)10. 模型分布 ........................................................................................ . (24)10.1 约翰逊族分布 (24)10.2 正态分布 (25)11. 例子 ........................................................................................ (26)12. 两个空间指数统计指数 (30)13. 表格......................................................................................... (31)14. 缩写词......................................................................................... (37)15. 参考文献......................................................................................... (39)索引......................................................................................... . (40)1. 介绍必须申请适当的方法检测,如果适用的话,进行过程测量,这些方法应证实有能力的过程实现所策划的结果。
哈工大博士学位论文模板

1.3
....................................................................................... 2
第 2 章 基本使用 ..................................................................................... 3
3.1
学 ................................................................................ 7
3.2 学
..................................................................... 7
第 1 章 绪论 ............................................................................................ 1
1.1
....................................................................................... 1
LATEX TEMPLATE FOR MASTER/DOCTOR THESIS/DISSERTATION OF HARBIN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Candidate: Supervisor: Academic Degree Applied for: Specialty: Affiliation: Date of Defense: Degree-Conferring-Institution:
Heterogeneous-productivity-shocks-elasticity-of-substitution-and-aggregate-fluctuations_2015_Moro

Heterogeneous productivity shocks,elasticity of substitution and aggregate fluctuationsqAlessio Moro a ,⇑,Rodolfo Stucchi ba Department of Economics and Business,University of Cagliari,Via Sant’Ignazio,17,09123Cagliari,ItalybCountry Department Andean Group,Inter-American Development Bank,Av.6de Agosto 2818,La Paz,Boliviaa r t i c l e i n f o Article history:Received 1April 2014Accepted 18March 2015Available online 11April 2015JEL classification:E13E20E30E32Keywords:Productivity dispersion Elasticity of substitution VolatilityAggregate productivitya b s t r a c tWe use a Dixit-Stiglitz setting to show that aggregate productivity fluctuations can be generated through changes in the dispersion of firms’productivity.When the elasticity of substitution among goods is larger than one,an increase in the dispersion raises aggre-gate productivity because firms at the top of the distribution produce most of output.When the elasticity is smaller than one,an increase in the dispersion reduces aggregate productivity because firms at the bottom of the distribution use most of inputs.We use individual firm level data from Spanish manufacturing firms to test the relationship between the dispersion of firms’productivity and aggregate productivity.The estimated coefficients are consistent with the predictions of the model:we find that an increase in the coefficient of variation of firms productivity of 1%increases aggregate productivity by 0.16%in sectors with an elasticity of substitution larger than one while the same increase in the standard deviation reduces aggregate productivity by 0.36%in sectors with an elasticity of substitution smaller than one.Ó2015Elsevier Inc.All rights reserved.1.IntroductionIn this paper we study the relationship between a time varying distribution of firms idiosyncratic productivity and aggre-gate productivity fluctuations.We first use a simple general equilibrium model with Dixit-Stiglitz indices to show that when the elasticity of substitution among a large number of goods is different from one,aggregate productivity is different from the average productivity of firms producing those goods.This implies that even if the deterministic part of firms productivity is equal to one and firms receive i.i.d.shocks from a common probability distribution function,aggregate productivity is different from one.This result follows from the fact that the elasticity of substitution determines consumers’willingness to change the pur-chases ratio of two goods when the price ratio of those goods changes.If the elasticity is high,consumers switch from one good to another for small price changes.When the elasticity is small,it takes high price differentials to induce consumers to/10.1016/j.jmacro.2015.03.0060164-0704/Ó2015Elsevier Inc.All rights reserved.qWe would like to thank Esteban Jaimovich,Vincenzo Merella,Galo Nuño and seminar participants at the University of Cagliari,the SIE (Roma 3),SAEe (Universidad de Malaga),RES (Royal Holloway),and LACEA-LAMES (Universidade de São Paulo)for the useful comments.The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not correspond to those of the Inter-American Development Bank,its Board of Executive Directors,or the countries they represent.The usual disclaimers apply.⇑Corresponding author.Tel.:+390706753341.E-mail addresses:amoro@unica.it (A.Moro),rstucchi@ (R.Stucchi).46 A.Moro,R.Stucchi/Journal of Macroeconomics45(2015)45–53slightly change the bundle of goods they are consuming.Thus,a low elasticity of substitution implies that production is dis-tributed evenly across producers.If this is the case,low productivityfirms have a large impact on the productive capacity of the economy and therefore aggregate productivity is low.On the other hand,when the elasticity of substitution is high,out-put is produced mostly by high productivityfirms and aggregate productivity is large.Put it differently,the share of more productivefirms in industry revenue increases with the degree of substitutability of products.It follows that,since aggregate productivity can be seen as an output-weighted average offirms productivity,it increases with the elasticity of substitution among products.An implication of an elasticity of substitution different from one is that,even when the mean of the distribution does not change,changes in the shape of the distribution offirms’productivity have the same effect of an aggregate shock hitting the productivity of allfirms.Although this paper does not provide a theory of the time variation of the distribution offirms’pro-ductivity,there is little reason to suppose that this distribution is stable over time.On the empirical side,Bloom et al.(2012) provide evidence suggesting that the variance of establishment,firm and industry level shocks in the U.S.is countercyclical. Kehrig(2011)shows that the dispersion of the level offirms productivity in U.S.manufacturing is counter-cyclical and it is more pronounced in durables than in non-durables.Bachman and Bayer(2009),using a panel of public and private German firms in manufacturing and retail,find that the variance of innovations tofirms’productivity increases in recessions.In this paper,we provide evidence that the variance of the distribution offirms productivity in Spanish manufacturing sectors var-ies sensibly over time.It follows that the interaction between a time varying productivity distribution and an elasticity of substitution different from one provides a source offluctuations in aggregate productivity without the need to assume a common(aggregate)shock to the productivity of allfirms,or an input–output matrix that transmits sectoral shocks across sectors.A crucial point here is that,depending on the elasticity of substitution,an increase in the dispersion offirms’productivity can have either a positive or a negative effect on aggregate productivity.When the elasticity is smaller than one,an increase in the dispersion has a negative effect,while the opposite holds with an elasticity larger than one.This happens because an increase in the dispersion implies that there are more high productivefirms and more low productivefirms.If the elasticity of substitution is high,most productivefirms employ most of inputs and produce most of output so when their number increases aggregate productivity also increases.When the elasticity of substitution is low,demand tends to be distributed evenly among producers,so an increase in the number of low productivefirms reduces aggregate productivity because these firms use most of inputs.To test the predictions of the model we use data from18Spanish manufacturing sectors.Wefirst estimate the elasticity of substitution among goods in each sector.This is smaller than one in14sectors and larger than one in4sectors.With the estimated elasticity of substitution we are able to construct,for each sector,the relevant measure of aggregate productivity. According to the model,sectors with an elasticity of substitution larger(lower)than one show an increase(decrease)in aggregate productivity when the dispersion of the productivity distribution increases.We test this implication in a regres-sion framework.We regress aggregate productivity of each sector on the coefficient of variation of productivity in each sector and the interaction between the coefficient of variation and a dummy variable that takes value one if the sector has an elas-ticity of substitution larger than one.The estimated coefficients are consistent with the predictions of the model;wefind that an increase of1%in the coefficient of variation of the distribution offirms’productivity increases aggregate productivity by0.16%in sectors with an elasticity of substitution larger than one while the same increase in the coefficient of variation reduces aggregate productivity by0.36%in sectors with an elasticity of substitution smaller than one.We are not thefirst to investigate the effects of a time varying dispersion offirms’productivity on aggregatefluctuations. The already mentioned papers by Bachman and Bayer(2009),Bloom et al.(2012)and Kehrig(2011)provide fully-fledged general equilibrium models that allow to study these effects.Bloom et al.(2012)show that when labor and capital adjust-ment costs are present,uncertainty shocks makefirms more cautious,thus delaying hiring and investment,which in turn depresses aggregate productivity and economic activity.Bachman and Bayer(2009)instead,stress the‘‘news’’role of changes in uncertainty in shaping aggregatefluctuations.Kehrig(2011)presents a model with overhead inputs–that become more expensive in booms–and entry and exit offirms.In equilibrium,only the most productive newfirms enter and only the most productive incumbents survive during economic expansions.1Compared to these contributions,we identify a new chan-nel through which changes in the dispersion offirms’productivity can lead to aggregatefluctuations.This is solely grounded in the elasticity of substitution among goods.2This paper also contributes to two other strands of the literature:the one that studies the existence of persistent produc-tivity differences amongfirms and the one that studies how the distribution of resources amongfirms affects aggregate productivity.Within the former,a closely related paper is Syverson(2004),who investigates the role of the elasticity of substitution on observed differences in plant level productivity.He points out,focusing on the concrete market,that barriers to substitutability of any kind(spatial,physical or brand driven)among producers,allow less productivefirms to survive,1See also Heathcote et al.(2014),who present a model in which the dispersion of wages across individuals is time varying.2More broadly,our paper also relates to the literature on the ability of models with a large number of sectoral shocks to generate aggregatefluctuations. Lucas(1981)and Dupor(1999)suggest that when the economy is sufficiently disaggregated,independent sectoral shocks wash out in the aggregate because of the law of large numbers.Instead,Horvath(1998),and in particular Acemoglu et al.(2012),show that the response of the aggregate economy to a large number of sectoral shocks depends on the input–output structure of the economy.thus decreasing average pared to Syverson (2004)we focus on the effect of goods substitutability on aggre-gate fluctuations.In the increasing literature on the distribution of resources across firms and aggregate productivity,Restuccia and Rogerson (2008)show how a misallocation of resources reduces aggregate TFP;Guner et al.(2008)analyze the role of restrictions on the size of firms for aggregate productivity;Hsieh and Klenow (2009)provide a quantitative evaluation of the impact of misallocation on aggregate TFP.In contrast with these contributions,we focus on an economy with no distor-tions.We show that changes in the distribution of resources across firms can have different effects on aggregate productivity depending on the elasticity of substitution among goods.The remaining of the paper is as follows:Section 2describes the model;Section 3reports the quantitative results;Section 4presents some robustness checks;and finally,Section 5concludes.2.The model 2.1.Sectors and firmsWe consider an economy with i ¼1;2;...;n broad sectors ,each producing a good also indexed by i .In turn,each broad sector i is composed of a set of atomless sectors indexed by j 20;1½ .In each sector j there is perfect competition and the representative firm in j produces output using the following production functiony ij ¼A ij N ij ;ð1Þwhere N ij is the amount of labor used in production and A ij is a firm specific productivity term.It follows that the represen-tative firm j maximizes profits according to the zero profit conditionp ij ¼w ij;ð2Þwhere w is the wage rate and p ij the price of output.2.2.HouseholdThere is a representative household in the economy consuming all goods from the 1;2;...;n broad sectors.The utility function isU ¼R ni ¼1a i log C i ;ð3Þwith R n i ¼1a i ¼1.Consumption from sector i is a Dixit-Stiglitz aggregator of the goods purchased in that sectorC i ¼Z1c h i À1h iij dj"#h i i:ð4ÞThe household is endowed with one unit of labor that she supplies inelastically in the market,earning the wage w .Thus,her budget constraint isR n i ¼1P i C i ¼w ;ð5Þwhere P i is the price index associated to the consumption index C i .The problem of the household is then to maximize (3)subject to (4)and (5).2.3.EquilibriumA competitive equilibrium for this economy is a wage rate w and,for each sector i ,a set of prices p ij ÈÉj 20;1½ ,a set ofallocations c ij ÈÉj 20;1½ for the household,a set of allocations y ij ;N ij ÈÉj 20;1½ for the representative firms,a consumption index C i and a price index P i such that:(a)given prices and the wage rate,allocations c ij ÈÉj 20;1½ of sectors i ¼1;...;n solve the household’s problem;(b)given prices and the wage rate,allocations y ij ;N ij ÈÉsolve the problem of the representative firm ij ;(c)the price and consumption indices of sector i are such that P i C i ¼R 10p ij c ij dj ;(d)goods and labor markets clear:y ij ¼c ij 8i ;jð6ÞA.Moro,R.Stucchi /Journal of Macroeconomics 45(2015)45–5347X n i ¼1N i ¼X n i ¼1Z 10N ij dj ¼1ð7Þ2.4.Model solutionTo solve the model,it is convenient to split the household’s problem in two stages.First,given price indices P i ,the con-sumer maximizes (3)subject to (5).The solution to this problem givesC i ¼a i wP i:ð8ÞSecond,as (8)gives the amount of resources the household optimally spends in sector i ,it is possible to solve for the optimal demand of goods within sector imax c ijC i ¼maxc ijZ1c h i À1h iij dj"#h iið9Þsubject toZ1p ij c ij dj ¼w a i ;where to derive the constraint in problem (9)we assumed P i C i ¼R 10p ij c ij dj .Below we prove that this condition holds in equi-librium.The first order conditions for problem (9)deliver the demand function for firm j in sector i :c ij ¼p ijP iÀh i C i :ð10ÞAlso,the demand function (10)implies that the price of C i isP i ¼Z1p 1Àh i ij dj!11Àhi:ð11ÞNote that using (10)and (11)it can be proved that P i C i ¼R 1p ij c ij dj .Finally,from (1)and (2)it holds that p ij y ij ¼wN ij .Integrating between 0and 1and noting that the total amount of labor used in sector i is N i ¼R 10N ij dj ,we can writeZ1p ij c ij dj ¼wN i :ð12ÞBy comparing (12)and the constraint of problem (9)it follows that the amount of labor used in sector i isN i ¼a i :2.5.Aggregate and average productivityBy using (2)to substitute for p ij in (11)it follows thatw i¼Z1A h i À1ij dj!1i:ð13ÞNext,by using (13)in (12)and P i C i ¼R 1p ij c ij dj ,we obtainC i ¼Z1A h i À1ij dj !1h i À1N i :ð14ÞEq.(14)represents the aggregate production function of sector i ,as it maps the total amount of labor used in production inthat sector into total output.In (14),the productivity term R 10A h i À1ij dj h i 1h i À1depends on individual firms productivity A ij ,and on the elasticity of substitution h i among goods produced in sector i .3Note thatA i ¼Z1A h i À1ij dj!1h iÀ1;ð15Þ3We are assuming that labor is the only input in production.Therefore aggregate labor productivity is equal to aggregate TFP.48A.Moro,R.Stucchi /Journal of Macroeconomics 45(2015)45–53represents aggregate productivity of sector i and differs from average productivity i¼R1A ij dj within the sector.Thus,depend-ing on the elasticity of substitution among goods,the distribution offirms’individual productivity A ij implies different levels of aggregate productivity.42.6.ImplicationsEq.(15)shows that aggregate productivity is a geometric,and not a linear,mean of individual productivity.Thus,when h i–1,the linear aggregation offirms’productivity does not provide an appropriate measure of aggregate productivity.To see the importance of h i in shaping aggregate productivity,assume that the productivity offirm j in i is A ij¼e e j,where each e j is an i.i.d.shock from a Nð0;r2Þdistribution.Thus,if the shock e j is zero,the productivity offirm j is equal to one.Then,by applying Theorem2in Uhlig(1996),it can be shown thatA i¼Z10A h iÀ1ijdj!1hiÀ1e h iÀ1ðÞr2=2;ð16Þwith probability one.As Eq.(16)makes clear,the value of the elasticity of substitution h i determines the effect that a change in the dispersion offirms’productivity has on aggregate productivity.With a unitary elasticity of substitution,h i¼1, changes in the dispersion offirms’productivity have no effect on aggregate productivity.When h i>1most productivefirms produce a large part of output in the economy.When the variance of the productivity distribution increases,the number of firms in the tails of the distribution increases,implying that there are more high productive,and more low productivefirms. As output is produced mainly by high productivefirms when h i>1,thesefirms attract most of labor,and an increase in the variance raises aggregate productivity.When h i<1production tends to be divided evenly among producers in the economy. To see why an increase in the variance of the productivity distribution reduces aggregate productivity when h i<1,consider the limit case in which h i tends to zero(Leontief demand).In this case,production is divided equally among producers, regardless of prices.In this situation,the least productivefirm determines the amount of output demanded to(and thus produced by)allfirms.When the variance of the productivity distribution increases the number offirms at the bottom of the distribution increases.As the elasticity of substitution is small,thesefirms attract most of the labor input in the economy and aggregate productivity declines.Summarizing,the main prediction of the model is that a time-varying dispersion infirms’productivity induces aggregate productivityfluctuations when the elasticity of substitution among goods is different from one.When the elasticity of substitution is different from one,changes in aggregate productivity can be the result of changes in the shape of the productivity distribution(in the example above a change in the variance of the distribution)instead of changes in the productivity of eachfirm(common aggregate shocks).In the next section we investigate whether the interaction between changes in the distribution of productivity shocks and an elasticity of substitution different from one has a quantitatively relevant impact on aggregate productivityfluctuations.3.Quantitative analysis3.1.Data and variablesWe use individualfirm-level data from the Survey on Business Strategies(Encuesta sobre Estrategias Empresariales,ESEE) which is an annual survey of a representative sample of Spanish manufacturingfirms.The sample covers the period 1991–2005.In thefirst year,firms were chosen according to a sampling scheme where weights depend on size.Allfirms with more than200employees were surveyed and their participation rate in the survey reached approximately70%of the overall population offirms in this category.Likewise,firms with10to200employees were surveyed according to a random sampling scheme with a participation rate close to5%.This selection scheme was applied to each industry in the manufacturing sector.Another important feature of the survey is that the initial sample properties have been maintained in all subsequent years.Newly created and exitingfirms have been recorded in each year with the same sampling criteria as in the base year.Therefore,due to this entry and exit process,the dataset is an unbalanced panel offirms.The number offirms with information on all the variables of interest is3,277and the number of observations is18,247.5 We classifiedfirms in18industries according NACE classification.Wefirst estimate the elasticity of substitution h i for each one of the18sectors(i¼1;2;...;18).Note that for each sector i,the demand function offirm j in the model, Eq.(10),can be written in logs as log c ijt¼Àh i log p ijtþh i log P itþlog C it.To obtain an estimating equation at thefirm level we replace h i log P itþlog C it by an industry specific set of time dummy variables,g it.By doing this we control for every 4Note that,as we abstract from capital in the model,the individualfirm productivity term can be interpreted as including the amount of capital used by the samefirm.Thus,the demand elasticity of substitution can be also interpreted as a production elasticity of substitution in(14).In this view,our results are related to de La Grandville(2009),who shows that in an aggregate model with capital and labor inputs,the larger this elasticity of substitution,the faster the growth rate of the economy.5The number offirms with1,2,3,...,15observations is899,359,239,190,195,221,136,127,170,120,122,103,116,133,147,respectively.See Doraszelski and Jaumandreu(2013)and Escribano and Stucchi(2014)for additional details on the dataset.A.Moro,R.Stucchi/Journal of Macroeconomics45(2015)45–5349non-observed time varying factor that affects homogeneously allfirms in the same sector.Additionally,we include a non-observed time invariant term,l ij,that capturesfirm specific characteristics.Finally,we include a random term v ijt that captures innovations that are not correlated with pijt.Therefore,for each sector i we estimatelog c ijt¼Àh i log p ijtþg itþl ijþv ijt;i¼1;2;...;18;ð17Þwhere c ijt is output offirm j in period t and pijtits price.6The output measure we use is the value of production in period t deflated using afirm specific price index(i.e.gross output).The price index is the same we use as regressor and is constructed as a Paasche-type price index computed from the percentage price changes thatfirms report to have made in the markets in which they operate.Because of the unobservedfixed effect,l ij,we estimate(17)using the within group estimator.Table1reports the estimation of h i for each industry i and its standard deviation.Wefind that all the coefficients but the one of‘‘Other Manufactured Products’’are positive,possibly due to the heterogeneity of products in that sector.There are two sectors with h i statistically larger than one,eight sectors with h i statistically lower than one,and for the remaining seven sectors it is not possible to reject the null hypothesis of h¼1.7Next,we look atfirms productivity in each sector for each year of the sample period1991–2005.We construct labor productivity by considering output per hour worked.Output is measured as described above.Table2reports the mean and standard deviation over time of the two main variables that we use in the analysis in the next section–i.e.the sector level of productivity and the sector coefficient of variation of productivity.That is,for each sector and each year,wefirst compute the mean and the coefficient of variation offirms productivity.Then,we compute the mean over time and the standard deviation over time of these two measures.3.2.Testing the implications of the modelTables1and2provide empirical evidence about the two basic ingredients of our model:(a)the elasticity of substitution among goods is different from one in all sectors,ranging from0.47to2.49;and(b)the dispersion offirms productivity shows a certain degree of time variation in all sectors.Our model suggests that in sectors in which the elasticity of substitution among goods is larger than one,an increase in the dispersion offirms’productivity increases aggregate productivity,while the opposite holds when the elasticity of substitution is smaller than one.This prediction can be formally tested by estimating the following regressionlog A it¼b1log CV itþb2log CV itÂ1½h i>1 þb3log A itþq tþ/iþu itð18Þwhere A it is the aggregate level of productivity of sector i in period t,constructed using the discrete counterpart of(15)and the value of h i reported in Table1,CV it is the coefficient of variation offirms’productivity in sector i and period t,and1½Á is an indicator function—i.e.,1½h i>1 is a dummy variable that takes value one if h i is larger than one.8We control for the average productivity of industry i at time t;it.This is important because we expect a positive relationship between the average and aggregate productivity in each industry.In(18)we do not allow it to vary with h because the elasticity of substitution does not influence the transmission of average productivity to aggregate productivity.In the robustness checks in Section4we drop this assumption.Finally,q t represents unobserved factors that affect in the same way the productivity of all sectors(for instance an economy wide trend in productivity)and/i is a set of time-invariant unobserved characteristics of each sector.Regarding the parameters of Eq.(18),the model implies b1<0;b2>0,and j b2j>j b1j.Table3shows thefixed-effectestimates of Eq.(18).Both the sign and the magnitude of the estimated coefficients are in line with the theoretical model, suggesting that the main predictions are supported by the data even after controlling for unobserved sectorsfixed-effects and other factors that affect in the same way the productivity of all sectors.As expected,average productivity affects linearly aggregate productivity.From a quantitative perspective,the estimated b1and b1þb2represent the elasticity of aggregate productivity to the coefficient of variation when h i is smaller and larger than one,respectively.Results in Table3suggest that the response of aggregate productivity is positive when h i>1,while it is negative when h i<1.In thefirst case,an increase in the coef-ficient of variation of1%increases aggregate productivity by0.157%.In the second case,the same increase in the coefficient of variation reduces aggregate productivity by0.364%.Thefit of the model is good;the R-squared is0.98.9Therefore,our results suggest that commonly measured aggregate productivityfluctuations can be in part the results of a time-varying dis-persion offirms’productivity.6As in the model,subindex ij means thatfirm j belongs to sector i.In the dataset,firms never move from one sector to another.7Broda and Weinstein(2006)estimate elasticities of susbsitution for products at different aggregation levels—3,5and7digit SITC—using US imports data for the period1972–2001,finding an average elasticity above one.As discussed in Broda and Weinstein(2006),the more disaggregated is the definition of industries,the more substitutable are goods and the larger is the estimated elasticity of substitution.In this paper we use a2-digit industry classification level andfind that the elasticity of substitution is smaller than one in several sectors.8The discrete counterpart of(15)for a number N of representativefirms j in sector i is Ai ¼P Nj¼1A h iÀ1ijN!1hiÀ1.9This R-squared is0.05larger than that of a model that includes only the average productivity.50 A.Moro,R.Stucchi/Journal of Macroeconomics45(2015)45–53。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。
Lecture 7: Blending and Bagging
Motivation of Aggregation Uniform Blending Linear and Any Blending Bagging (Bootstrap Aggregation)
Lecture 6: Support Vector Regression
kernel ridge regression (dense) via ridge regression + representer theorem; support vector regression (sparse) via regularized tube error + Lagrange dual
Motivation of Aggregation
Recall: Selection by Validation
G(x) = gt∗(x) with t∗ = argmin Eval(gt−)
t∈{1,2,··· ,T }
• simple and popular
• what if use Ein(gt ) instead of Eval(gt−)? complexity price on dVC, remember? :-)
G(x) = sign
T t =1
αt
·
gt (x)
with αt ≥ 0
• include select: αt = Eval(gt−) smallest • include uniformly: αt = 1
• combine the predictions conditionally
G(x) = sign
Machine Learning Techniques (機器學習技法)
Lecture 7: Blending and Bagging
Machine Learning Techniques
0/23
Blending and Bagging
Roadmap
1 Embedding Numerous Features: Kernel Models
Machine Learning Techniques
4/23
Blending and Bagging
Motivation of Aggregation
Why Might Aggregation Work?
• mix different weak hypotheses uniformly —G(x) ‘strong’
• mix the predictions from aபைடு நூலகம்l your friends non-uniformly —let them vote, but give some more ballots
• combine the predictions conditionally —if [t satisfies some condition] give some ballots to friend t
T t =1
qt
(x)
·
gt
(x)
with qt (x) ≥ 0
• include non-uniformly: qt (x) = αt
aggregation models: a rich family
Machine Learning Techniques
3/23
Blending and Bagging
• need one strong gt− to guarantee small Eval (and small Eout)
selection: rely on one strong hypothesis
aggregation: can we do better with many (possibly weaker) hypotheses?
You can . . .
• select the most trust-worthy friend from their usual performance —validation!
• mix the predictions from all your friends uniformly —let them vote!
3 Distilling Implicit Features: Extraction Models
Machine Learning Techniques
1/23
Blending and Bagging
Motivation of Aggregation
An Aggregation Story
Your T friends g1, · · · , gT predicts whether stock will go up as gt (x).
• ...
aggregation models: mix or combine hypotheses (for better performance)
Machine Learning Techniques
2/23
Blending and Bagging
Motivation of Aggregation
• aggregation =⇒ feature transform (?)
Aggregation with Math Notations
Your T friends g1, · · · , gT predicts whether stock will go up as gt (x).
• select the most trust-worthy friend from their usual performance
G(x) = gt∗ (x) with t∗ = argmint∈{1,2,··· ,T } Eval(gt−)
• mix the predictions from all your friends uniformly
G(x) = sign
T t =1
1
·
gt
(x)
• mix the predictions from all your friends non-uniformly