### Table2. Threshold values (and percentage change from estimated value) for the change in predicted model outcome, from partridge exclusion to pheasant and partridge co-existence, for those parameters not directly estimated in this study to which the model outcome was considered to be highly sensitive. In all cases, values were determined with all other model equation parameters kept fixed at their estimated levels. Percentage change cannot be calculated for either apheasant or apartridge since the estimated value of apheasant is 0, and there is no threshold value for apartridge

"... In PAGE 9: ...analyses were also conducted on apheasant, dpheasant, and b, a and b for both host spe- cies, since these were the other quantities not directly estimated in this study to which the model outcome was considered to be highly sensitive. However, the model outcome of partridge exclusion was also relatively robust to changes in these values (see Table2 for a summary of all sensitivity analyses conducted). SPATIAL SEPARATION When the model was run for each host species alone with the parasite, the qualitative outcome for the pheasant was unchanged (remaining in co-existence with the parasite), while that for the partridge chan- ged from exclusion of the host to exclusion of the parasite.... ..."

### Table 7: Exclusion Restrictions

"... In PAGE 15: ... We estimated each of the five possible versions of this modification of the model (one for each policy variable), and tested the joint exclusion of the policy variables included in the GROWTH equation. The results of this exercise mirror those reported in Table7 , thus we do not report them in detail here. The second restriction of interest is the exclusion of GROWTH from the NEWENT equation (1).... In PAGE 15: ... Using IO and DEFENSE as instruments for GROWTH, we estimated this modification of (1) using 2SLS. The estimates of the coefficient on GROWTH we obtained are reported in Table7 ; they are statistically insignificant in all eight cases. Taken together, our results broadly support the importance of new-enterprise formation in generating economic growth in Russia.... ..."

### Table 4: Exclusion Restrictions

"... In PAGE 10: ... We then tested the null hypothesis that the coefficient on the newly included variable in the growth regression is zero using a simple t test. Results of this exercise are reported in Table4 . Note that the null hypothesis is not rejected for any of the six variables used as instruments: the smallest p value we obtain is 0.... ..."

### Table 2: The exclusion of possible strategies based on concerns (black indicates exclusion)

"... In PAGE 5: ... If none of the existing systems can be discontinued, both of the integration strategies Choose One and Start from Scratch are excluded. Table2 summarizes the exclusion of strategies based on these concerns, where black denotes exclusion of a strategy. Although compatibility is a continuous scale, for the sake of discussion it is divided into three classes: High, Modest, and None.... ..."

### Table 1. Reasoning on exclusions and dependencies.

2006

"... In PAGE 6: ... Reversely, if activity A becomes invalid then all activities C such that (C ) A) 2 Dep are made invalid (see rule /1/ below). Keeping the exclusions and dependencies explicitly has the advantage of stronger ltering ( Table1 ). In particular, if exclusion fA; Bg is to be added to Ex and there is a dependency (A ) B) 2 Dep then we can make activ- ity A invalid (and the exclusion is resolved so it does not need to be kept in Ex).... ..."

Cited by 4

### Table 1: The exclusion of possible strategies

in Architectural Concerns When Selecting an In-House Integration Strategy – Experiences from Industry

"... In PAGE 2: ... Retireability is typically re-evaluated given the resulting set of possible strategies, until an acceptable balance is found between the estimated cost of integration and the problems caused by retirement (A, B, C, E2). Table1 summarizes the exclusion of strategies based on these concerns (black denotes exclusion). Table 2 shows the results for Architectural Compatibility and Retireability in the cases, and Table 3 the resulting exclusion of strategies (black background) and the chosen strategy (circles).... ..."