### TABLE II. COMMON PROBLEMS

### Table 1: Common Problems, their Consequences and Recommended Solutions

in ENCOURAGING BEST PRACTICE IN QUANTITATIVE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: AN INCOMPLETE LIST OF OPPORTUNITIES

"... In PAGE 20: ... Concluding Thoughts In this paper, we have identified some of the most often encountered problems in quantitative management research. Table1 provides a summary of these concerns, their consequence and recommendations for solutions. While not an exhaustive list, we hope that the paper provides readers with better practice solutions to these issues.... In PAGE 26: ...26 Table1 (Continued) Problem/Error Consequence Solution Structural Models SEM or PLS? Under certain conditions, PLS estimates approximate SEM estimates. Otherwise the results may differ.... ..."

### Table 5. Common and problem-specific parameters of the GA.

### Table 1: the common outline of problems (1) and (2).

"... In PAGE 3: ... The common schematic outline dltk abs of dltk 1 | proof of (1) | and of dltk 2 | proof of (2) | is the proof of (8x y: (q(x; y) 8z: (p(x; z) p(y; z))) ^ ^ q(a; b) ^ (p(a; a) _ p(b; b))) 9x: p(b; x) (3) Formula (3) is obtained by applying fdltk 1 to (1). The proof of (3) | which has been given in Natural Deduc- tion [Prawitz, 1965] | is shown in Table1 . Each line of Table 1 represents a proof step of dltk abs and has a la- bel to identify it, a formula, and a justi cation, which explains what inference rule has been applied to ob- tain the formula.... In PAGE 3: ... The proof of (3) | which has been given in Natural Deduc- tion [Prawitz, 1965] | is shown in Table 1. Each line of Table1 represents a proof step of dltk abs and has a la- bel to identify it, a formula, and a justi cation, which explains what inference rule has been applied to ob- tain the formula. The proof starts with assumption 1,... ..."

### Table 3. Some Common Nutrition Problems and the Potential Role of Forest Food

"... In PAGE 33: ... Many are mundane, chronic problems that plague many areas of the developing world. Table3 shows some of the more common health problems of forest peoples and the forest foods that can contribute to solving them. Christian et al.... ..."

### Table 5. Comparison of FB to FP on commonly solved problems.

2000

"... In PAGE 11: ... The total numbers of problems in each category are as follows: Small 584 Medium 100 Large 108 Very Large 97 In Tables 1-6, we provide total iteration counts and runtimes for those problems where one of the solvers took less iterations to reach the optimum than the other. Since these are pairwise comparisons each table contains information on a different group of problems, that is, the 21 problems where (FP) outperforms (FB) as reported in Table5 and the 21 where (FP) outperforms (FO) as reported in Table 6 are not the same set of problems. That is why the iteration and runtime totals are... ..."

Cited by 48

### Table 6. Comparison of FO to FP on commonly solved problems.

2000

"... In PAGE 11: ... The total numbers of problems in each category are as follows: Small 584 Medium 100 Large 108 Very Large 97 In Tables 1-6, we provide total iteration counts and runtimes for those problems where one of the solvers took less iterations to reach the optimum than the other. Since these are pairwise comparisons each table contains information on a different group of problems, that is, the 21 problems where (FP) outperforms (FB) as reported in Table 5 and the 21 where (FP) outperforms (FO) as reported in Table6 are not the same set of problems. That is why the iteration and runtime totals are... ..."

Cited by 48

### Table 1. Comparison of LOQO to MF on commonly solved problems.

2000

"... In PAGE 15: ... Note that the size reported may differ from the model itself, since ampl preprocesses a problem before passing it to the solvers. The total number of problems in each category is as follows: Small 584 Medium 100 Large 108 Very Large 97 In Table1 , we provide total iteration counts and runtimes for those problems where one of the solvers took less iterations to reach the opti- mum than the other. We have included problems that were not solved... In PAGE 17: ... A step that may otherwise have been shortened because it did not reduce a linear combination of the barrier objective and the primal infeasibility may be accepted by reducing either one. Table1 shows that, in general, taking bolder steps allows the algorithm to reach the optimum quicker, as MF performs better than LOQO more often than vice versa. Also, more freedom in taking steps at the beginning reduces the need to adjust for the initialization of slack variables.... ..."

Cited by 48

### Table 1. Comparison of LOQO to FB on commonly solved problems.

2000

Cited by 48