```Date: Dec 14, 2012 8:46 AM
Author: Halitsky
Subject: Thanks for the terminological/methodological corrections, and also<br> for the ref to gnuplot.

Thanks as always for your patience with my gobbledy-gook.I. Terminological matters:A.  Yes ? I meant the term ueSlope to denote the ?coefficient of u*e?in c on (e,u,u*e,u^2).B. What I meant by this particular piece of gobbledy-gook:?From each computation of ueSlope on (ubar, ebar) we have a pair ofslopes with a pair of associated probabilities ...?was:?From each execution of ueSlope on (ubar, ebar), we obtain a pair ofcoefficients for the ubar,ebar predictors and a pair of probabilitiesassociated with these coefficients?.Further, I assumed that each of these probabilities IS generated bythe protocol you gave in your post of 12/7 at 5:27:************************Let    estimated coefficient of the extra predictor in the second modelt = ----------------------------------------------------------------.         estimated standard error of that estimated coefficientRefer t to the t-distribution with df = n-k, where n = # ofobservations, and k = # of coefficients in the second model. (If themodel has an intercept then k = # of predictors + 1.) ?***********************But if this is not correct, please straighten me out here so that Iknow (for general purposes) how to calculate coefficient-associatedprobabilities.II. Methodological matter:You wrote:?Regardless of the answers to my previous questions, you can't splitnaturally paired p's, sort them, re-pair them, and then compare the re-paired p's -- which you shouldn't compare in the first place, evenwithout the shuffling, because p-values are NOT effect sizes.?OK ? thanks for explaining that.Since I want to concentrate right now on your request for linearitychecks of Aubque_Se on L (and also the question of the nature of theplots which you raised in your post of 12/13 @ 1108pm), I will notpursue this matter further at the moment.But after the checks are done, I would like to return to the questionof the correct way to investigate whether there is a MoSS and/orSubset effect involving ?ueSlope on (ubar,ebar)? (which I?ll now referto as ueCoeff on (ubar,ebar), as per your  terminological correctionnoted in IA above.)And if you can see right off that there is some necessary relationshipbetween the regression ueCoeff on (ubar,ebar) and the regressionAubque on L, I?d be very curious to know what it is, inasmuch as Ithink the data regarding ueCoeff on (ubar,ebar) will show a MoSS and/or Subset effect when it is analyzed correctly.Thanks as always for your patience.
```