Date: Dec 5, 2012 10:08 AM
Author: Halitsky
Subject: Holy Moly, were you right about covariances for Rub and Rubq !!!!

Here is the table for the covariances AubC and AubqC for the
regressions Rub = c on (u,e,u*e) and Rubq = c on
(e,u,u*e,u^2)respectively.
           a1   a3   b1  b47   c1   c2  "H-L
          C S  C S  c S  c S  C S  C S   Het"

N1 AubC   H L  H L  H L  H L  H L  H L    6
   AubqC  H L  H L  H L  H L  H L  H L    6

N2 AubC   H L  H L  H L  H L  H L  H L    6
   AubqC  H L  H L  H L  H L  H L  H L    6

N3 AubC   L L  L L  H H  H L  H H  H L    2
   AubqC  L L  H H  L H  L L  H H  H L    1

R1 AubC   L H  L L  L L  H H  H L  H H    1
   AubqC  L H  L L  L L  H H  H L  H H    1

R2 AubC   L H  L L  H L  L H  H L  H H    2
   AubqC  L H  H L  L L  L H  H L  H H    2

R3 AubC   L H  H L  L H  L L  H H  H L    2
   AubqC  L H  H L  L H  L H  H H  L H    1

Note that this time, the ?het? singularity is ?H-L Het-ness?, rather
than ?L-H Hetness?, as was the case for the average slopes Auq, Aubu,
Aubqu in the last table posted.

Quite a remarkable result, at least in my naive and ignorant opinion.