0 Up votes0 Down votes

2 views20 pagesbusiness analytics

Mar 06, 2016

Ba Assignment 3

© © All Rights Reserved

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

business analytics

© All Rights Reserved

2 views

Ba Assignment 3

business analytics

© All Rights Reserved

- stock price
- Statistics 578 Assignment 5 Homework
- 3.4. A computer ANOVA output is shown below. Fill in the blanks. You may give bounds on the P-value.
- Readme
- Ch25 Exercises
- The Unscrambler Methods
- Rcbd
- linear regression PDF.pdf
- OPTIMIZATION OF THE EFFECTS OF DEGUMMING PARAMETERS ON THE REMOVAL OF PHOSPHOTIDES, AND THE STABILITY OF REFINED PALM OIL.
- RELTIQUES_V1N1
- Assignment 2 Stats
- IJETR021139
- An Ova
- Summary Table for Stat Techniques.pdf
- 79c
- An Ova
- Bab 2.ppt
- Sas
- Hypothesis-Testing (2).pptx
- Stat a Tutorial

You are on page 1of 20

ASSIGNMENT 3

PURULIA ROAD, RANCHI

Submitted by:

RADHIKA PADIA (ROLL NO 15)

CONCE

PT

3

1

2

2

2

1

2

1

2

5

4

2

2

1

2

3

1

2

3

2

3

3

3

1

4

4

5

4

4

5

2

2

1

3

3

1

1

4

3

1

3

3

CIS

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

AG

E

24

22

27

26

29

23

24

22

26

48

37

32

32

37

41

23

34

38

32

29

36

34

32

28

29

47

24

43

42

44

24

24

23

36

39

30

28

42

39

27

36

47

MARTI

AL

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

NU

MC

AR

4

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

5

2

1

3

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

3

1

3

4

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

1

AVAG

E

2.5

3

2.5

2

2.5

3

3

3

2

0.5

1.5

3

1

1

2

2

3

2

1.5

2.5

1.5

1.5

2

2.5

2

1

0.5

1

1.5

0.5

1

2

2.5

2

2

2

4.5

2

1.5

2

2.5

2

NUM

TRIP

1

1

0

2

1

0

0

1

1

3

2

0

0

0

3

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

3

5

9

2

2

7

2

0

0

0

0

0

2

2

1

3

1

1

CONCE

PT1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

NUMCA

R1

1

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

GROUPS

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

3

4

5

4

5

5

4

5

4

5

4

4

4

4

5

4

4

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

42

42

47

43

62

55

39

58

43

59

43

42

47

38

37

51

47

51

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

3

1

1

1

3

1

4

2

2

1

2

1

3.5

0.5

1

1.5

0.5

0.5

1.5

2

0.4

0.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1

0.8

1

1.5

2

1

3

4

4

6

4

5

6

2

7

3

4

4

3

8

2

1

6

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

QUESTON 1:

Divide the sample into two groups

a. Those showing high interest 4 or 5 rating on CONCEPT

b. Those showing low interest 1or 2or 3 rating on CONCEPT

Cross tabulate high versus low interest with CIS. How strong is the association between

interest in the policy and the current insurance supplier? Is the association statistically

significant? What does it tell you?

SOLUTION:

THE RECODED VALUES OF CONCEPT IS NAMED AS CONCEPT1 LABELLED AS FOLLOWS:

1:HIGH INTEREST GROUP

Counts

CONCEPT1(rows) by CIS(columns)

0

Total

22

12

34

18

26

Total

30

30

60

Test Statistic

Value

Df

p-Value

Pearson Chi-Square

6.787

1.000

0.009

INTERPRETATION:

Let us assume,

Ho: the association between interest in the policy and the current insurance supplier is not strong.

H1: the association between interest in the policy and the current insurance supplier is strong.

From the above analysis, we get to know that p value is 0.009 which is less than 0.05 (at 5% level of

significance).

Therefore Ho is rejected and H1 is accepted

We can conclude that the association between interest in the policy and the current insurance

supplier is very strong and significant.

QUESTION2:

We can consider the concept rating (CONCEPT) as an Independent Variable and the

remaining 6 variables as predictor variables. Regress CONCEPT on the other variables:

a. Interpret the regression equation and indicate the extent to which those variations in the

predictor variables explain the variation in the independent variable?

b. Is each of the predictor variables significant at 0.05 level? Can a simpler mode (involving

fewer predictors be developed? If so what is the model and what is the percentage

improvement of the simple model over the full model?

SOLUTION:

PART a:

OLS Regression

Dependent Variable

CONCEPT

60

Multiple R

0.869

Squared Multiple R

0.755

0.727

0.705

Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

Std.

Coefficient

Tolerance

p-Value

CONSTANT

1.360

0.588

0.000

2.315

0.025

CIS

-0.067

0.211

-0.025

0.746

-0.318

0.752

MARTIAL

-0.098

0.239

-0.034

0.673

-0.409

0.684

AGE

0.056

0.013

0.418

0.451

4.132

0.000

NUMCAR

0.033

0.099

0.023

0.914

0.328

0.744

AVAGE

-0.442

0.140

-0.282

0.579

-3.160

0.003

NUMTRIP

0.226

0.051

0.383

0.627

4.458

0.000

Analysis of Variance

Source

SS

df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

Regression

81.359

13.560

27.248

0.000

Residual

26.375

53

0.498

INTERPRETATION:

The regression equation is:

Let us assume,

Ho: the regression equation is not significant in predicting the dependent variable.

H1: the regression equation is significant in predicting the dependent variable.

From the above analysis, we can see that

The p value is 0.00 which is less than 0.05 at 5% level of significance ,therefore Ho is

rejected and H1 is accepted i.e. , the regression equation is significant in predicting the

dependent variable.

Also, squared multiple r is 0.755, which indicates that the goodness of fit is at a fairly good

level.

THE p value of the constant is 0.025 which suggests that changes in the predictor variables are

associated with changes in the dependent variable.

PART b:

1 OLS Regression

Dependent Variable

CONCEPT

60

Multiple R

0.323

Squared Multiple R

0.105

0.089

1.290

Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

Std.

Coefficient

Tolerance

p-Value

CONSTANT

2.633

0.235

0.000

11.184

0.000

CIS

0.867

0.333

0.323

1.000

2.603

0.012

Analysis of Variance

Source

SS

df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

Regression

11.267

11.267

6.774

0.012

Residual

96.467

58

1.663

INTERPRETATION:

The regression equation is :

H0: the regression equation is not a significant predictor of the dependent variable (concept1)

H1: the regression equation is a significant predictor of the dependent variable (Concept1)

The p value is 0.012, which is less than 0.05 at 5% level of significance, which indicates that H0 is

rejected and H1 is accepted.

Therefore CIS is a significant predictor of concept at 0.05 level of significance.

2. OLS Regression

Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

Tolerance

p-Value

0.449

Std.

Coefficient

0.000

CONSTANT

-0.549

-1.222

0.227

AGE

0.098

0.012

0.739

1.000

8.348

0.000

Analysis of Variance

Source

SS

df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

Regression

58.796

58.796

69.685

0.000

Residual

48.937

58

0.844

INTERPRETATION:

The regression equation is:

concept=0.549+0.098 AGE

H0: the regression equation is not a significant predictor of the dependent variable( concept1)

H1: the regression equation is a significant predictor of the dependent variable( Concept1)

The p value is 0.000 , which is less than 0.05 at 5% level of significance ,which indicates that H0 is

rejected and H1 is accepted.

Therefore AGE is a significant predictor of concept at 0.05 level of signicance.

3. OLS Regression

Effect

Coefficient

CONSTANT

2.211

MARTIAL

1.253

Standard Error

Std.

Tolerance

Coefficient

0.282

0.000

.

0.341

0.435

1.000

p-Value

7.851

0.000

3.679

0.001

Analysis of Variance

Source

SS

df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

Regression

20.380

20.380

13.532

0.001

Residual

87.353

58

1.506

INTERPRETATION:

The regression equation is:

H0: the regression equation is not a significant predictor of the dependent variable (concept1)

H1: the regression equation is a significant predictor of the dependent variable ( Concept1)

The p value is 0.001, which is less than 0.05 at 5% level of significance , which indicates that H0 is

rejected and H1 is accepted.

Therefore MARTIAL is a significant predictor of concept at 0.05 level of signicance.

4. OLS Regression

Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

CONSTANT

3.395

0.352

Std.

Coefficient

0.000

Tolerance

p-Value

9.633

0.000

Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

NUMCAR

-0.195

0.182

Std.

Coefficient

-0.139

Tolerance

p-Value

1.000

-1.073

0.288

Analysis of Variance

Source

SS

df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

Regression

2.095

2.095

1.150

0.288

Residual

105.638

58

1.821

INTERPRETATION:

The regression equation is:

concept=3.3950.195 NUMCAR

H0: the regression equation is not a significant predictor of the dependent variable( concept1)

H1: the regression equation is a significant predictor of the dependent variable( Concept1)

The p value is 0.288 , which is MORE than 0.05 at 5% level of significance ,which indicates that H0

is accepted and H1 is rejected.

Therefore NUMCAR is NOT a significant predictor of concept at 0.05 level of signicance.

5. OLS Regression

Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

Tolerance

p-Value

0.295

Std.

Coefficient

0.000

CONSTANT

4.968

16.856

0.000

AVAGE

-1.074

0.150

-0.685

1.000

-7.164

0.000

Analysis of Variance

Source

SS

df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

Regression

50.576

50.576

51.321

0.000

Residual

57.158

58

0.985

INTERPRETATION:

The regression equation is:

concept=4.9681.074 AVAGE

H0: the regression equation is not a significant predictor of the dependent variable( concept1)

H1: the regression equation is a significant predictor of the dependent variable( Concept1)

The p value is 0.000 , which is less than 0.05 at 5% level of significance ,which indicates that H0 is

rejected and H1 is accepted.

Therefore AVAGE is a significant predictor of concept at 0.05 level of signicance.

6. OLS Regression

Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

Tolerance

p-Value

0.166

Std.

Coefficient

0.000

CONSTANT

2.136

12.843

0.000

NUMTRIP

0.430

0.053

0.729

1.000

8.116

0.000

Analysis of Variance

Source

SS

Df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

Regression

57.286

57.286

65.863

0.000

Residual

50.447

58

0.870

INTERPRETATION:

The regression equation is:

H0: the regression equation is not a significant predictor of the dependent variable( concept1)

H1: the regression equation is a significant predictor of the dependent variable( Concept1)

The p value is 0.000 , which is less than 0.05 at 5% level of significance ,which indicates that H0 is

rejected and H1 is accepted.

Therefore NUMTRIP is a significant predictor of concept at 0.05 level of signicance.

Best Subset Regression:

DEPENDENT VARIABLE: CONCEPT

Mallows' Cp MSE

Variables

0.546

0.538

42.339

0.844

AGE

0.532

0.524

45.374

0.870

NUMTRIP

0.707

0.696

9.524

0.555

AGE, NUMTRIP

0.662

0.650

19.222

0.639

AVAGE, AGE

0.754

0.741

1.295

0.474

0.709

0.693

11.100

0.561

0.754

0.736

3.190

0.481

0.754

0.736

3.230

0.482

0.755

0.732

5.101

0.489

10

0.755

0.732

5.108

0.489

11

0.755

0.727

7.000

0.498

Model No

AIC

AICC

BIC

Variables

164.044

164.473

170.327

AGE

165.868

166.296

172.151

NUMTRIP

139.824

140.551

148.201

AGE, NUMTRIP

148.348

149.076

156.726

AVAGE, AGE

131.290

132.401

141.762

141.423

142.534

151.894

133.172

134.756

145.738

133.217

134.802

145.783

135.071

137.225

149.731

10

135.078

137.232

149.739

11

136.956

139.780

153.711

Criteria

Value

Adjusted R-Sq

0.741

AIC

131.290

AIC (Corrected)

132.401

Schwarz's BIC

141.762

Criteria

Value

INTERPRETATION:

From the tables above, we see that the adjusted R sq of AVAGE, AGE, NUMTRIP is highest,

i.e. 0.741 which indicates that it is the simple and best subset model.

The AIC value of AVAGE, AGE, NUMTRIP is 131.290, which is the lowest, hence the best

subset.

So, the percentage improvement of the simpler model over the full model would be as

follows:

[(0.741-0.727)/ 0.727]*100= 1.9257%

QUESTION 3:

Divide the sample into 4 groups: Rushmore Single, Rushmore Married, Other Company

Single, and Other Company Married. Run a single factor ANOVA to test the null hypothesis

that the mean of the CONCEPT for the four groups are the same at 5% level of significance?

If not which group has the highest average rating?

SOLUTION:

Analysis of Variance

Effects coding used for categorical variables in model.

The categorical values encountered during processing are

Variables

Levels

GROUPS (4 levels)

Dependent Variable

CONCEPT

60

Multiple R

0.563

Squared Multiple R

0.317

Analysis of Variance

Source

Type III SS

df

Mean Squares

F-Ratio

p-Value

GROUPS

34.150

11.383

8.663

0.000

Error

73.583

56

1.314

INTERPRETATION:

LET US ASSUME:

Ho: the mean of the CONCEPT for the four groups are the same.

H1: the mean of the CONCEPT for the four groups are different.

From the analysis of variance, we get to know that p value is 0.000 at 5% level of

significance ,which is less than 0.05.therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate

hypothesis is accepted.

We interpret that at least one of the means is different.

Now to know which mean is different, we need to perform the pairwise comparison,

PAIRWISE COMPARISON:

Post Hoc Test of CONCEPT

Using least squares means.

Using model MSE of 1.314 with 56 df.

GROUPS(i) GROUPS (j) Difference p-Value 95% Confidence Interval

Lower

Upper

-0.569

0.560

-1.719

0.581

0.148

0.992

-1.263

1.558

-1.727

0.001

-2.848

-0.606

0.717

0.454

-0.562

1.996

-1.158

0.011

-2.109

-0.207

-1.875

0.001

-3.128

-0.622

INTERPRETATION:

We compare the p value of all the 6 groups and select those p values whose value is less than

0.05.

From the above table, p values of group (1,4) , (2,4),( 3,4) are less than 0.05.

Amongst the group , we get to know that variable 4 (rushmore married) is common in all the

groups having p value less than 0.05.

Therefore , it means that the mean of RUSHMORE MARRIED(4) is different .

QUESTION 4:

Divide the NUMCAR as follows One and More than One. Now using the CONCEPT and

the 4 groups (as developed in 3 above) run a 2 way ANOVA with the second concept as

NUMCAR groups. Is there any difference between the results obtained in 3 above and this

new 2 way ANOVA at 5% level of significance?

SOLUTION:

Analysis of Variance

Effects coding used for categorical variables in model.

The categorical values encountered during processing are

Variables

Levels

GROUPS (4 levels)

1.000

2.000

NUMCAR1 (2 levels)

0.000

1.000

3.000

Dependent Variable

CONCEPT

60

Multiple R

0.593

Squared Multiple R

0.351

4.000

Analysis of Variance

Source

Type III SS

df

GROUPS

34.538

11.513

8.568

0.000

NUMCAR1

2.614

2.614

1.945

0.169

GROUPS *NUMCAR1

2.430

0.810

0.603

0.616

Error

69.873

52

1.344

INTERPRETATION:

We run a two way annova with the 4 GROUPS and NUMCAR.

Let us assume,

Hog: the average means of CONCEPT is similar as the average means of GROUPS.

H1 g: the average means of CONCEPT is different from the average means of GROUPS.

Ho n: the average means of CONCEPT is similar as the average means of NUMCAR

H1 n: the average means of CONCEPT is different from the average means of NUMCAR.

From the p values, we can see the null hypothesis (ho g) is rejected due to its value being less

than 0.05, which means that the average means of CONCEPT is different from the average

means of GROUPS.

Similarly, the p value of NUMCAR is greater than 0.05, therefore we accept the null

hypothesis( ho n), i.e. , the average means of CONCEPT is similar as the average means of

NUMCAR.

Now to know which variable of the GROUP has a different mean, we perform a pairwise

comparison of the GROUPS.

PAIRWISE COMPARISON

Post Hoc Test of CONCEPT

Using model MSE of 1.344 with 52 df.

Groups I)

Groups (J)

Difference

p-Value

Lower

Upper

-0.615

0.529

-1.781

0.550

0.089

0.998

-1.340

1.519

-1.786

0.001

-2.922

-0.650

0.705

0.483

-0.592

2.001

-1.170

0.012

-2.134

-0.207

-1.875

0.001

-3.145

-0.605

INTERPRETATION:

We compare the p value of all the 6 groups and select those p values whose value is less than

0.05.

From the above table, p values of group (1,4) , (2,4),( 3,4) are less than 0.05.

Amongst the group , we get to know that variable 4 (Rushmore Married) is common in all the

groups having p value less than 0.05.

Therefore , it means that the mean of RUSHMORE MARRIED(4) is different .

Therefore, there is no difference in the results obtained in question 3 above and this new 2

way ANOVA at 5% level of significance.

QUESTION 5:

Factor analyse the full 60x7 data matrix using principal component analysis using Varimax

rotation. Apply Kaisers criterion (eigenvalue > 1) to extract the principal components. How

will you interpret each set of rotated factor loadings?

Factor Analysis

1

3.413

1.065

0.913

0.663

0.432

0.353

0.161

Component Loadings

1

CONCEPT

0.906

-0.014

CIS

0.460

0.496

AGE

0.855

0.100

MARTIAL

0.619

0.075

NUMCAR

-0.207

0.853

AVAGE

-0.779

0.269

NUMTRIP

0.786

0.048

1

3.413

1.065

1

48.754

15.217

1

CONCEPT

0.904

-0.051

CIS

0.481

0.477

AGE

0.858

0.065

MARTIAL

0.621

0.049

NUMCAR

-0.171

0.861

AVAGE

-0.767

0.301

NUMTRIP

0.788

0.015

1

2.791

1.063

1

39.871

15.182

INTERPRETATION:

There are two latent factors at work which explains 63.97% of the total market behaviour of

the rushmore insurance.

P1=0.906 CONCEPT +0.460 CIS+ 0.855 AGE +0.619 MARTIAL0.207 NUMCAR0.779 AVAGE+ 0.786

P2=0.014 CONCEPT +0.496 CIS +0.100 AGE +0.075 MARTIAL+0.853 NUMCAR+0.269 AVAGE+0.048

FACTORS

PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS

CONCEPT

CIS

AGE

MARTIAL

NUMCAR

AVAGE

NUMTRIP

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

NUMTRIP is

SELF CHARACTERISTICS

Nomenclature of PC2 consisting of factors- NUMCAR is

USAGE CHARACTERISTICS

Therefore we can say that 48.754% of market would buy insurance depending on self

characteristics and 15.21% of market would buy insurance depending on the car

characteristics.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.WISDOM OF OFFERING:

From the CHI SQUARE test of association, we understood that the association between

interest in the policy and the current insurance supplier is very strong and significant, which

means that the policy would be acceptable by the majority of respondents.

2. TARGET MARKET:

The marital status,

Average age of cars owned

The number of trips taken by the car owned

AGE1(i)

AGE1(j) Difference

p-Value

95% Confidence Interval

Lower

Upper

-0.932

0.022

-1.762

-0.103

-1.991

0.000

-2.821

-1.162

-2.883

0.000

-4.054

-1.713

-1.059

0.010

-1.921

-0.196

-1.951

0.000

-3.145

-0.757

-0.892

0.208

-2.086

0.302

20-30: 1

30-40: 2

40-50: 3

50 and above : 4

After the pairwise comparison, we can see that AGE GROUP 20-40 is the segment highly interested

in the insuance policy.

Also, from the above analysis, (question 4) , we concluded that the RUSHMORE MARRIED group

is the most significant group and therefore this segment can serve as the target market of the

insurance company.

From the factor analysis, we saw that 84.96% of market would buy insurance depending on self

characteristics and 12.948% of market would buy insurance depending on the car

characteristics.

3.FURTHER RESEARCH REQUIRED:

Cluster analysis could be done to segment the market further more.

- stock priceUploaded bySingh Ak
- Statistics 578 Assignment 5 HomeworkUploaded byMia Dee
- 3.4. A computer ANOVA output is shown below. Fill in the blanks. You may give bounds on the P-value.Uploaded byKamiran Muhammad
- ReadmeUploaded byrkumaravelan4137
- Ch25 ExercisesUploaded byamisha2562585
- The Unscrambler MethodsUploaded byMostafa Afify
- RcbdUploaded byAnda Brahmantyo
- linear regression PDF.pdfUploaded bySyed Hussain
- OPTIMIZATION OF THE EFFECTS OF DEGUMMING PARAMETERS ON THE REMOVAL OF PHOSPHOTIDES, AND THE STABILITY OF REFINED PALM OIL.Uploaded byijsret
- RELTIQUES_V1N1Uploaded bygustavo orozco
- Assignment 2 StatsUploaded bysharma_nidhi07
- IJETR021139Uploaded byerpublication
- An OvaUploaded byRenu Venugopal
- Summary Table for Stat Techniques.pdfUploaded byClemAguinaldo
- 79cUploaded bySalman Zia
- An OvaUploaded bytaiar2010
- Bab 2.pptUploaded bypuput indah sari
- SasUploaded byEveryday Levine
- Hypothesis-Testing (2).pptxUploaded byJames De Torres Carillo
- Stat a TutorialUploaded byvidar
- 檔案下載Uploaded byAnonymous 7CxwuBUJz3
- School Resource Availability and Planning as Correlate of Students’ Attitude to Learning in Senior Secondary Schools in Education Zone B and C of Yobe State, Nigeria.Uploaded byAnonymous izrFWiQ
- The Effect of Employee Relationships and Knowledge Sharing on Employees Performance an Empirical Research on Service IndustryUploaded byThanh Dung
- Ugong Volume 5 Number 1 Dec. 2012-21Uploaded byMhae Kiks
- Research Project.docxUploaded bydhruvpatel_bca2010
- Statistics 1 Revision SheetUploaded byRachana Raveendra
- CHAP 11.pptUploaded bySenelwa Anaya
- Colgate EditedUploaded byShouri Reddy
- queso mantecoso.pdfUploaded byHannibal JP
- 015-0713Uploaded byMustafa Demircioğlu

- Vote of ThanksUploaded bypatrocs
- PreAlgebra Reference SheetUploaded byLoco Roco
- SSRN-id1096549Uploaded byCarlos Cuadros
- SimulTrain e SUploaded bygloria11112
- PythonUploaded bypallavidel114992
- CA 08102001 eUploaded byRicardo Lopez
- 2111287Uploaded byJorge A. López
- Groupby-having.pdfUploaded bydaveix3
- Defense Contractors Capture of Pentagon Officials Through the Revolving DoorUploaded bytobihi
- How Does Ethical Leadership Influence EmployeesUploaded byAndres Bertel
- observation3-malalavocabularyUploaded byapi-351601386
- Nostratic and Altaic - Alexander VovinUploaded byTalskubilos
- Eng Designmanual Revnov2012Uploaded byIlma Aulia
- Page 0008Uploaded byCharith Koggala Liyanage
- Great Gatsby Style Paper Final DraftUploaded bylwcalli13
- FX 2017 Katalog EnglischUploaded byWANKEL25
- DebugUploaded byEfajeaer Esuteaenteo
- mr350-mx-uy-pa-usUploaded byhalyd
- 2013 a Simple Carrier-Based Modulation for the SVM of the Matrix ConverterUploaded byTran Quoc Hoan
- Mazzone1003Uploaded byjpm75
- Asic 11 and DCT4 plus user manualUploaded byRedi Pratomo
- MCQ5 ED Bipolar Junction Transistor BJTUploaded byAyush Gupta
- The Major Characteristics of AdhesivesUploaded byrodrigo_venancio
- 1 National Income Accounting.pptUploaded bysatriana_eka
- GTD Trigger ListUploaded byjohngtd
- Manual Miller Dimension 652Uploaded byNano Rios Chavez
- g12 Ojt GuideUploaded byErmalyn Gadon
- Acts Vol III - The Beginnings of the Christiannity Vol III - The Text of ActsUploaded byLeonardo Alves
- 127-0000-R08-WA-with-TR-021-022-023Uploaded bysparkyoshida
- Document 1330701.1 ORACLEUploaded byJosé Chipana

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.