大小生意的区分对销售及销售管理的重要意义

小生意与大生意有着很大的不同 ,对它们的进一步区分对销售和销售管理都具有重要意义。主要在于 :购买者在小生意和大生意决策程序不同 ,销售和展示产品的方法有别 ,销售管理中评价的指标有别。     

论行政证据的规制与保障功能

行政证据不同于行政诉讼证据,它是一种非讼类证据,主要用于行政执法程序中,具有重要的作用和特殊的法律地位。行政证据是规范行政权力行使的有效手段,是维护公共利益、保护相对人合法权益的重要保障。行政证据是能独立存在并起重要作用的重要证据制度。     

基于客户/服务器模式的非正常RPC的研究

分析了客户／服务器模式下远程过程调用(RPC)原理及其实现方法，重点讨论了五种非正常情况下RPC的处理方法。     

完善民事简易程序的现实必要性及其应遵守的原则

民事简易程序亟需加以完善.完善的现实必要性一是"权利的勃兴是一般背景";二是"冲突增多与司法资源有限是客观需求".完善时必须遵守最低程序保障原则、确保基本公正的原则和司法大众化的原则.     

论我国民事诉讼检察监督制度的完善

目前民事检察监督存在监督范围狭窄、监督方法过于单一、监督流于形式等诸多问题;针对这些问题,有必要采取一系列对策,如转变观念、完善立法、建立检察人员和审判人员轮换机制,以完善我国民事诉讼检察监督制度,实现司法公正。     

关联理论视角下的隐喻翻译研究——以《抗击新冠肺炎疫情的中国行动》英译为例

借助Pragglejaz团队的“隐喻识别程序”对《抗击新冠肺炎疫情的中国行动》白皮书中的隐喻进行分类描述,从认知关联视角切入对各类隐喻翻译进行案例分析。为实现白皮书类外宣文本国际传播的最佳社会效益,最大语境效果、共同的语境假设以及交际传播的目的是译者在实现隐喻跨语际转换时的重要考量准则。     

论民事诉讼程序中的个人主体性——以程序利益与程序主体的关系为视角

国家主体型、国家—个人主体型和个人主体型三种不同类型的程序主体性,反应了诉讼程序从国家控制到个体的人的自由的发展趋势。现代诉讼程序强调程序主体的个人主体性,个体的人应当成为程序独立的自主、自在性主体,这就需要其在诉讼程序中具有独立的属己利益支撑。民事诉讼程序应当淡化国家色彩,以个人的程序利益保障为基点,实现个人的独立性程序地位,进而使民事诉讼程序获得真正的独立性。     

Sequential Hypothesis Tests for Identifying the Minimum Dose with a Threshold Effect

We propose a procedure to identify a lowest dose having greater effect than a threshold dose under the assumption of monotonicity of dose mean response in dose response test. So, we use statistics based on contrasts among sample means and apply a group sequential procedure to our procedure to identify effectively the dose. If we can identify the dose at an early step in the sequential test, since we can terminate the procedure with a few observations, the procedure is useful from an economical point of view. In a simulation studies, we compare the superiority among these procedures based on three contrasts.     

Accounting for Uncertainty in Heteroscedasticity in Nonlinear Regression

Toxicologists and pharmacologists often describe toxicity of a chemical using parameters of a nonlinear regression model. Thus estimation of parameters of a nonlinear regression model is an important problem. The estimates of the parameters and their uncertainty estimates depend upon the underlying error variance structure in the model. Typically, a priori the researcher would not know if the error variances are homoscedastic (i.e., constant across dose) or if they are heteroscedastic (i.e., the variance is a function of dose). Motivated by this concern, in this paper we introduce an estimation procedure based on preliminary test which selects an appropriate estimation procedure accounting for the underlying error variance structure. Since outliers and influential observations are common in toxicological data, the proposed methodology uses M-estimators. The asymptotic properties of the preliminary test estimator are investigated; in particular its asymptotic covariance matrix is derived. The performance of the proposed estimator is compared with several standard estimators using simulation studies. The proposed methodology is also illustrated using a data set obtained from the National Toxicology Program.     

A Five-Decision Testing Procedure to Infer the Value of a Unidimensional Parameter

ABSTRACT

A statistical test can be seen as a procedure to produce a decision based on observed data, where some decisions consist of rejecting a hypothesis (yielding a significant result) and some do not, and where one controls the probability to make a wrong rejection at some prespecified significance level. Whereas traditional hypothesis testing involves only two possible decisions (to reject or not a null hypothesis), Kaiser’s directional two-sided test as well as the more recently introduced testing procedure of Jones and Tukey, each equivalent to running two one-sided tests, involve three possible decisions to infer the value of a unidimensional parameter. The latter procedure assumes that a point null hypothesis is impossible (e.g., that two treatments cannot have exactly the same effect), allowing a gain of statistical power. There are, however, situations where a point hypothesis is indeed plausible, for example, when considering hypotheses derived from Einstein’s theories. In this article, we introduce a five-decision rule testing procedure, equivalent to running a traditional two-sided test in addition to two one-sided tests, which combines the advantages of the testing procedures of Kaiser (no assumption on a point hypothesis being impossible) and Jones and Tukey (higher power), allowing for a nonnegligible (typically 20%) reduction of the sample size needed to reach a given statistical power to get a significant result, compared to the traditional approach.