"... In PAGE 5: ...Details of the valuation calculations made for each cost and benefit are provided in Section 3 (Results) for each fuel alternative. Table1 presents a brief summary of the valuation techniques used for different cost and benefit categories. The references refer to general descriptions of the valuation methods, except for Keller et al.... ..."

"... In PAGE 6: ... The rst experiment uses a Depot valuation policy of (x + y) + n. The results in Table1 show the test applications clustering on the Depots with low grid references and therefore correspondingly lower bids8. The result matrix in Table 1 shows the average load at each grid position, and the 95% con dence intervals.... In PAGE 6: ... The results in Table 1 show the test applications clustering on the Depots with low grid references and therefore correspondingly lower bids8. The result matrix in Table1 shows the average load at each grid position, and the 95% con dence intervals. Table 2 shows the e ect of changing the weighting of one of the grid components, with the Depot val- uation policy (2x + y) + n.... ..."

"... In PAGE 6: ... The rst experiment uses a Depot valuation policy of (x + y) + n. The results in Table1 show the test applications clustering on the Depots with low grid references and therefore correspondingly lower bids8. The result matrix in Table 1 shows the average load at each grid position, and the 95% con dence intervals.... In PAGE 6: ... The results in Table 1 show the test applications clustering on the Depots with low grid references and therefore correspondingly lower bids8. The result matrix in Table1 shows the average load at each grid position, and the 95% con dence intervals. Table 2 shows the e ect of changing the weighting of one of the grid components, with the Depot val- uation policy (2x + y) + n.... ..."

"... In PAGE 9: ...f real numbers. The values of H9263 are utilities. In the Reactor problem, there are three utility valuations. One of these is shown in Table1 , and we refer the reader to Bielza and Shenoy (1998) for the complete description. A probability valuation H9266 for s is a function H9266: H9024s 3 [0, 1].... In PAGE 9: ...0, 1]. The values of H9266 are probabilities. In the Reactor problem, there are three probability valuations. One of these is shown in Table1 . What do these probability Table 1 Utility Valuation H92631 and Probability Valuation H92701 in the Reactor Problem... In PAGE 12: ... This is so because IDs insist on working with conditionals. For example, the conditional for T has the domain {D1, A, T} in the ID (as seen in Figure 3), and the valuation H92701 has the domain {A, T} in the VN (as seen in Table1 ). The distribution tree for T in the ID could be computed from the VN as H92542 2{D1,T} V H92702 V H92701.... ..."

"... In PAGE 25: ... Another important point to note is that formal tariffs only make up a limited part of Vietnam apos;s trade restrictions - various kinds of opaque non-tariff barriers are often more important. For instance, the tariffs for 34 broad product categories, including most consumer goods (summarized in Table7 below), are levied on reference prices established by the Vietnamese authorities, rather than on the c.... ..."

"... In PAGE 18: ...able 7 : achievable recycling rates for industrial packaging waste..............................................42 Table8 : economic valuations.... ..."

"... In PAGE 8: ... The valuations are standard and omitted. Selected valuations for commands are in Table4 . The main point to note is the treatment of fault.... ..."

"... In PAGE 8: ... The valuations are standard and omitted. Selected valuations for commands are in Table4 . The main point to note is the treatment of fault.... ..."

"... In PAGE 15: ... Table 4 presents the corresponding data for the three treatments for which the response mode was chocolate. Table5 reports summary statistics for those comparisons between treatments that are relevant for our design. The first entry in each row identifies a ratio of two valuations.... In PAGE 18: ...istributions of valuations is overwhelmingly significant (p lt; 0.001). This result is not surprising, but it gives some assurance that our experiment is picking up whatever causal factors lie behind commonly-observed differences between willingness to accept and willingness to pay. As the entries in the first row of Table5 highlight, the comparison between WTAMG and WTPMG is deficient in experimental control. A WTAMG/WTPMG ratio greater than 1 could be evidence of loss aversion in chocolate, of loss aversion in money (combined with the current endowment hypothesis), of tactical heuristics, of Hicksian income and substitution effects, or of any combination of these factors.... ..."

"... In PAGE 3: ... In particular, it is possible that the best allocation assigns bidders to days in a manner that is inconsistent with their sorted order even if their valuation functions do not cross. Table1 shows a case in which there are five bidders and two days with two items available each day. The best allocation is to give the day 1 objects to bidders b1 and b3, and the day 2 objects to b2 and b4.... ..."