Sentences with phrase «what effect they estimated»

Not exact matches

This estimate ignores the budget's claimed economic growth effects; it is difficult to determine what debt would be when counting economic effects based on the information given.

The goal of determining real (inflation - adjusted) performance is not completely hopeless, though, because we know what causes long - term changes in money purchasing power and we can roughly estimate the long - term effects of these causes.

What the conventional scoring process does not do is incorporate the the effects of any changes in macroeconomic variables — things like GDP, inflation, and employment — and how those might alter the cost estimate.

What is important is not to decide in each case just how much effect prayer had, for lacking divine wisdom we can not estimate the delicate balance of forces involved.

Crop estimate reports are mixed in California and it remains to be seen what effects, if any, the draught will have on the coming crop.

Many are wondering what the effects will be — although some impacts of Romanian and Bulgarian free movement have already happened, with an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 people born in the A2 currently living in Britain.

«The government needs to urgently explain what impact this proposal will have on the public finances, what the administration costs are estimated to be, how the scheme would work and what effect it would have on the balance sheets of the bank,» he said.

«It is difficult to estimate what the net effect of the indirect and other offsetting effects will be,» the report found.

«Employment numbers were up toward the end of 2014, we felt that hiring was going to be up for 2015, again, we'll see what'll happen in the second half of the year, but that's important because we estimate that for every job that's created on Wall Street, and in financial services, two other jobs are created in other parts of the city's economy, one other job outside of New York City but within New York State, so there is that multiplier effect.»

In the last boundary changes which took effect in 2010, UK Polling's estimate was that Labour's net loss relative to other parties across Britain would be 28 seats (based on the 2005 result) or 8 seats with a 5 % swing from Labour to the Tories which is what happened (see note below).

The study applied «medium to high» future emissions estimates of heat - trapping gases, as assumed by the California state government, to models designed to assess what effect climate change would have on national parks like Yosemite, Death Valley, Redwood, Joshua Tree and Sequoia.

«It will be much more interesting to see what the agency says when it actually develops a proposed rule to regulate greenhouse gas emissions — and therefore has to estimate the effects of that proposal.»

By using climate models to simulate what air pollution was like in 1850 and 2000, Jason West at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his colleagues have estimated its effect on current death rates.

Olson, R., et al. «What is the effect of unresolved internal climate variability on climate sensitivity estimates?.»

In addition, a wide range of forcing schemes designed to span the approximate range of uncertainties associated with anthropogenic climate forcing estimates were generated and implemented in order to assess what differences in effects exist between the «best guess» counter-anthropogenic geoengineering forcing scheme and other plausible schemes.

It's not necessarily obvious to the uninitiated what a huge effect this ~ 2ºC uncertainty in ECS estimates has on scenarios that attempt to predict the magnitude and timing of climate change impacts (e.g. the AR5 RCPs).

In the case of charter schools, however, an estimate of their effect on students who enroll is exactly what we want, as the basic idea behind charter school reform is that only students who want to should attend them.

[3] But what makes it particularly valuable is that it directly compares the impact of reducing sticker prices versus increasing institutional spending per student — and does so using a rigorous methodology that allows an estimate of causal effects, rather than just correlations between tuition, institutional spending, and student outcomes.

In some applications, having an estimate of a program effect that is valid only for compliers is problematic, because it would be useful to know what would happen if the program were expanded to other populations.

What could account for the differences in the estimated effects of SAT performance and the high - school dropout rates?

This provided us with what are known as «baseline test scores» that can be used to obtain more precise estimates of program effects.

Applying their estimates of the causal effect of added spending to the actual increases in spending suggests that the average poor - nonpoor gap in school attainment should have been more than closed — which is not even close to what we observe.

The outcome of the lottery, a random event, was used to create what statisticians refer to as an instrumental variable, which obtains unbiased estimates of the effects of attending private school on students» test scores.

To correct for this, we perform what economists call a «treatment on the treated» analysis to produce estimates of the effects that a trusted organization such as the College Board or ACT would achieve were it to conduct the intervention.

The authors of the North Carolina study attempt to control for hard - to - measure permanent characteristics of students who attend charters by estimating what is known as student «fixed effect» models, which involves measuring how student performance changes as students switch between the charter and traditional sectors.

That lower bound of the estimated effect is what we will use as we calculate the economic worth of a teacher by combining a teacher's impact on achievement with the associated labor market returns.

We therefore see our lottery estimates as indicative of what the No Excuses charter model can accomplish, rather than an overall charter - school treatment effect.

However, recent studies using randomized admission lotteries at charter schools and the random assignment of teachers has suggested that simple, low - cost methods, when they control for students» prior achievement and characteristics, can yield estimates of teacher and school effects that are similar to what one observes with a randomized field trial.

What's risky is moving from a complicated statistical model to estimating the discrete effect of individual teachers, precisely the leap of faith being made by The Times.

The first is what statistical approach to use to estimate TPP effects.

With such data, it is possible to provide reliable estimates that separate the effects of the pre-k program from what would have happened without the program, due to the experiences the children would have otherwise had as they aged.

«It is always possible to produce estimates of what the model designates as teacher effects.

Such statements reflect the current views of Barnes & Noble with respect to future events, the outcome of which is subject to certain risks, including, among others, the general economic environment and consumer spending patterns, decreased consumer demand for Barnes & Noble's products, low growth or declining sales and net income due to various factors, possible disruptions in Barnes & Noble's computer systems, telephone systems or supply chain, possible risks associated with data privacy, information security and intellectual property, possible work stoppages or increases in labor costs, possible increases in shipping rates or interruptions in shipping service, effects of competition, possible risks that inventory in channels of distribution may be larger than able to be sold, possible risks associated with changes in the strategic direction of the device business, including possible reduction in sales of content, accessories and other merchandise and other adverse financial impacts, possible risk that component parts will be rendered obsolete or otherwise not be able to be effectively utilized in devices to be sold, possible risk that financial and operational forecasts and projections are not achieved, possible risk that returns from consumers or channels of distribution may be greater than estimated, the risk that digital sales growth is less than expectations and the risk that it does not exceed the rate of investment spend, higher - than - anticipated store closing or relocation costs, higher interest rates, the performance of Barnes & Noble's online, digital and other initiatives, the success of Barnes & Noble's strategic investments, unanticipated increases in merchandise, component or occupancy costs, unanticipated adverse litigation results or effects, product and component shortages, the potential adverse impact on the Company's businesses resulting from the Company's prior reviews of strategic alternatives and the potential separation of the Company's businesses, the risk that the transactions with Microsoft and Pearson do not achieve the expected benefits for the parties or impose costs on the Company in excess of what the Company anticipates, including the risk that NOOK Media's applications are not commercially successful or that the expected distribution of those applications is not achieved, risks associated with the international expansion contemplated by the relationship with Microsoft, including that it is not successful or is delayed, the risk that NOOK Media is not able to perform its obligations under the Microsoft and Pearson commercial agreements and the consequences thereof, risks associated with the restatement contained in, the delayed filing of, and the material weakness in internal controls described in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 27, 2013, risks associated with the SEC investigation disclosed in the quarterly report on Form 10 - Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 26, 2013, risks associated with the ongoing efforts to rationalize the NOOK business and the expected costs and benefits of such efforts and associated risks and other factors which may be outside of Barnes & Noble's control, including those factors discussed in detail in Item 1A, «Risk Factors,» in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 27, 2013, and in Barnes & Noble's other filings made hereafter from time to time with the SEC.

Such statements reflect the current views of Barnes & Noble with respect to future events, the outcome of which is subject to certain risks, including, among others, the effect of the proposed separation of NOOK Media, the general economic environment and consumer spending patterns, decreased consumer demand for Barnes & Noble's products, low growth or declining sales and net income due to various factors, possible disruptions in Barnes & Noble's computer systems, telephone systems or supply chain, possible risks associated with data privacy, information security and intellectual property, possible work stoppages or increases in labor costs, possible increases in shipping rates or interruptions in shipping service, effects of competition, possible risks that inventory in channels of distribution may be larger than able to be sold, possible risks associated with changes in the strategic direction of the device business, including possible reduction in sales of content, accessories and other merchandise and other adverse financial impacts, possible risk that component parts will be rendered obsolete or otherwise not be able to be effectively utilized in devices to be sold, possible risk that financial and operational forecasts and projections are not achieved, possible risk that returns from consumers or channels of distribution may be greater than estimated, the risk that digital sales growth is less than expectations and the risk that it does not exceed the rate of investment spend, higher - than - anticipated store closing or relocation costs, higher interest rates, the performance of Barnes & Noble's online, digital and other initiatives, the success of Barnes & Noble's strategic investments, unanticipated increases in merchandise, component or occupancy costs, unanticipated adverse litigation results or effects, product and component shortages, risks associated with the commercial agreement with Samsung, the potential adverse impact on the Company's businesses resulting from the Company's prior reviews of strategic alternatives and the potential separation of the Company's businesses (including with respect to the timing of the completion thereof), the risk that the transactions with Pearson and Samsung do not achieve the expected benefits for the parties or impose costs on the Company in excess of what the Company anticipates, including the risk that NOOK Media's applications are not commercially successful or that the expected distribution of those applications is not achieved, risks associated with the international expansion previously undertaken, including any risks associated with a reduction of international operations following termination of the Microsoft commercial agreement, the risk that NOOK Media is not able to perform its obligations under the Pearson and Samsung commercial agreements and the consequences thereof, the risks associated with the termination of Microsoft commercial agreement, including potential customer losses, risks associated with the restatement contained in, the delayed filing of, and the material weakness in internal controls described in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 27, 2013, risks associated with the SEC investigation disclosed in the quarterly report on Form 10 - Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 26, 2013, risks associated with the ongoing efforts to rationalize the NOOK business and the expected costs and benefits of such efforts and associated risks and other factors which may be outside of Barnes & Noble's control, including those factors discussed in detail in Item 1A, «Risk Factors,» in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended May 3, 2014, and in Barnes & Noble's other filings made hereafter from time to time with the SEC.

Obviously in a very small company or private sale this becomes much harder / impossible as it can't be floated in any meaningful way, but versions of this wisdom of crowd type effect can be done by approaching a few outside parties and asking them what they would pay / how they would value it (similar to asking a few estate agents for valuations of a house before a private sale) to at least get some benchmark estimates of what similar private players might pay.

«Whittling down guesses or extrapolations from limited observations by a factor of 10 or even 100 does not make these estimates any more credible, and the fact that they are the best available data is not sufficient to justify their use when the consequence may be extermination for cats... What I find inconsistent in an otherwise scientific debate about biodiversity is how indictment of cats has been pursued almost in spite of the evidence, and without regard to the differential effects of cats in carefully selected, managed colonies, versus that of free - roaming pets, owned farm cats, or truly feral animals.

What that paper does is estimate the effect of El Nino, volcanic aerosols, and solar variations on global temperature.

For what it's worth, I haven't specifically checked for the effect of non-linearities on the underlying trend (as estimated based on the model mean) on the liberality of the test on the tropospheric trend presented in the test reported in Table III in Santer et al..

Just to follow - up on John Finn's question (# 10), if one puts in a rough value for the emissivity of the earth (whatever that might be), so one is no longer assuming it is a perfect blackbody, then does the resulting estimate for climate sensitivity correspond to what one would expect in the absence of any feedback effects?

``... estimates of future rises remain hazy, mostly because there are many uncertainties, from the lack of data on what ice sheets did in the past to predict how they will react to warming, insufficient long - term satellite data to unpick the effects of natural climate change from that caused by man and a spottiness in the degree to which places such as Antarctica have warmed....

It's not necessarily obvious to the uninitiated what a huge effect this ~ 2ºC uncertainty in ECS estimates has on scenarios that attempt to predict the magnitude and timing of climate change impacts (e.g. the AR5 RCPs).

This imbalance is really an important quantity — estimates of how much warming is in the «pipeline», the size of the aerosol cooling effect etc. all depend on knowing what this number is.

If so, I would suggest you work out what the rough temperature - CO2 relationship is over glacial to interglacial time scales (Petit et al etc)(or even over the last 1000 years — Gerber et al, 2003) and estimate how big an effect a ~ 1 deg C rise would have on CO2.

Specifically, if sulphur emissions as estimated in Stern D. I. (2005) «Global sulfur emissions from 1850 to 2000», Chemosphere 58, 163 - 175 and the database supporting that paper are substituted for those that were used to produce the SRES and / or ABARE projections, what is the effect on the global mean temperature up to now, and the projected increase between now and 2030?

Then, instead of throwing out the data as hopelessly compromised and starting the experiment over with these factors corrected, you (a) do a study estimating how miscalibrated, how defective and how improperly located your instruments were and apply adjustments to all past data to «correct» the improper reading, (b) you do a study to estimate the effect of the external factors at the time you discover the problem and apply adjustments to all past data to «correct» the effects of the external factors even though you have no idea what the effect of the external factor actually was for a given instrument at the time the data was recorded, because you only measured the effect years later and then at only some locations, (c) you «fill in» any missing data using data from other instruments and / or from other measurements by the same instrument, (d) you do another study to determine how best to deal with measurements from different instruments over different time periods and at different locations and apply adjustments to all past data to «correct» for differences between readings from different instruments over different time periods at different locations.

Likewise what estimates are there for the effect of eroded solids being deposited in the world's oceans?

From what is written about the models, even the scientists running them admit the effects of those are really just estimates, not results from first physical principles.

I think the damage they estimate is about what 4 feet of sea level rise would cause because of the effect of storm surge.

Obviously, there is still considerable confusion over what effect (if any) the poor station siting problem has had on estimates of U.S. temperature trends.

But think for a moment about what is actually being said here: if MXD is measuring temperature and there is no elevation effect, then the temperatures being estimated in the Briffa reconstruction are for varying elevations.