Table 3: Bayesian Multiple Comparison Results
|
Group A |
Group B |
Prθb(TEGroupA ≥ TEGroupB) |
|
G3 |
G4 |
0.383 |
|
G2 |
G4 |
0.915 |
|
G1 |
G4 |
0.980 |
|
G2 |
G3 |
0.002 |
|
G1 |
G3 |
0.547 |
|
G1 |
G2 |
0.069 |
|
rest of G4 |
F1 |
0.641 |
|
F31 |
rest of G1 |
0.403 |
|
G3 |
F1 |
0.933 |
|
G2 |
F1 |
0.990 |
|
G1 |
F1 |
0.994 |
|
F31 |
G4 |
0.996 |
|
F31 |
G3 |
0.917 |
|
F31 |
G2 |
0.834 |
34
More intriguing information
1. Transgression et Contestation Dans Ie conte diderotien. Pierre Hartmann Strasbourg2. Intertemporal Risk Management Decisions of Farmers under Preference, Market, and Policy Dynamics
3. Categorial Grammar and Discourse
4. The name is absent
5. Fiscal federalism and Fiscal Autonomy: Lessons for the UK from other Industrialised Countries
6. Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 11
7. Towards a Mirror System for the Development of Socially-Mediated Skills
8. The name is absent
9. The name is absent
10. The Integration Order of Vector Autoregressive Processes