Robustness test Sample Clauses

Robustness test. The robustness of the product must also be determined in the course of the framework of testing, in order to detect manufacturing variations. In this context, it can be necessary to maintain actual characteristics of some prototypes deliberately outside the nominal values, and even in the threshold range or outside the limits of tolerance.
View SourceView Similar (4)
Robustness test. In this section, we conduct robustness tests on the impact of political and economic factors on SOE-involved alliances. To capture the overall impact of those country-level factors, we include all of them in the regression model. Since political and economic factors could be correlated, we construct a single index by using the principal component analysis of these seven key variables (“First Principal Component”) suggested by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇ (2017). The details of the approach are shown in Online Appendix Table B3. We take the first principal component to build the index since the eigenvalue is greater than 1 and accounts for 26.6% of the variation across the seven variables. The significantly negative coeffieint of the first principal component shown in the model suggests the robustness of our results. Besides, we also consider that the impact of political and economic factors on SOE- involved alliances might be driven by the large proportion of Chinese SOE-involved deals compared with other countries.25 To mitigate this concern, we remove the alliance deals with Chinese local partners from the analysis. We find that our main results are unaffected. The robust results are reported in Online Appendix Table B4. Furthermore, we control for the impact of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) between two signatory countries on the cross-border activities, as BITs could protect and stimulate the foreign investment such as cross-border mergers (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2021) and international collaboration in producing innovation (Bian et al., 2021). We add a dummy variable (“BIT Dummy”) in our baseline model, which equals one if the BIT is in place in a given year between the paired countries, and zero otherwise.26 The results in Online Appendix Table B5 show that impact of political and economic factors on SOE-involved alliances remains significant after controlling for the BIT effect. Also, the significantly positive coefficient of BIT Dummy suggests that the signature of BIT could encourage more foreign firms to ally with local SOEs 25 Table 1 indicates that the Chinese SOE-involved cross-border alliances account for 27.23% of the total number of SOE-involved deals in the world. 26 If BIT are terminated between the paired countries during the sample period, the dummy is equal to zero for the period before the signature date and for the period after the termination date. than non-SOEs in the host countries.
View Source

Related to Robustness test

  • Laboratory Testing All laboratories selected by UPS Freight for analyzing Controlled Substances Testing will be HHS certified.

  • Performance Testing (a) All performance tests of the Project, including any Initial Performance Test required in Section 2 of Appendix VIII, will be performed in accordance with the test procedures set forth in Appendix VIII (“Performance Test”), including additional procedures and protocols related to Performance Testing as mutually agreed between Buyer and Seller (“Test Procedures”). Seller shall bear all costs and receive all revenues, if applicable, associated with all Performance Tests. (b) After the Initial Delivery Date and during the Delivery Term, Buyer will have the right to conduct a Performance Test (“Buyer Performance Test”) no more than once a calendar year to demonstrate whether the Project is capable of delivering the Distribution Services at the Contract Capacity. Within 30 calendar days following a Buyer Performance Test, Seller will have the right to retest the Project with a Performance Test (“Seller Retest”). For the avoidance of doubt, the results of any Seller Retest will supersede the results of the preceding Buyer Performance Test. (i) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is capable of delivering Distribution Services at or above ninety-nine percent (99%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, the Contract Capacity will remain the Initial Contract Capacity; (ii) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is capable of delivering Distribution Services at more than or equal to eighty-five (85%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, but less than ninety-nine percent (99%) of the Initial Contract Capacity (“Testing Band”), the Contract Capacity will be automatically adjusted (upwards or downwards) to the capacity commensurate with the amount of Distribution Services the Project delivered during the Performance Test within the Testing Band. (iii) If a Buyer Performance Test or, if a corresponding Seller Retest has occurred, a Seller Retest demonstrates the Project is not capable of delivering Distribution Services of at least eighty-five percent (85%) of the Initial Contract Capacity, an Event of Default shall occur in accordance with Section 7.1(a)(viii).

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is a NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASPP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram, , the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”), and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by LEA pursuant to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. ▇▇▇ shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by ▇▇▇.

  • Drug Testing (A) The state and the PBA agree to drug testing of employees in accordance with section 112.0455, F.S., the Drug-Free Workplace Act. (B) All classes covered by this Agreement are designated special risk classes for drug testing purposes. Special risk means employees who are required as a condition of employment to be certified under Chapter 633 or Chapter 943, F.S. (C) An employee shall have the right to grieve any disciplinary action taken under section 112.0455, the Drug-Free Workplace Act, subject to the limitations on the grievability of disciplinary actions in Article 10. If an employee is not disciplined but is denied a demotion, reassignment, or promotion as a result of a positive confirmed drug test, the employee shall have the right to grieve such action in accordance with Article 6.

  • Stability Testing Patheon will conduct stability testing on the Products in accordance with the protocols set out in the Specifications for the separate fees and during the time periods set out in Schedule C. Patheon will not make any changes to these testing protocols without prior written approval from Client. If a confirmed stability test failure occurs, Patheon will notify Client within [***], after which Patheon and Client will jointly determine the proceedings and methods to be undertaken to investigate the cause of the failure, including which party will bear the cost of the investigation. Patheon will not be liable for these costs unless it has failed to perform the Manufacturing Services in accordance with the Specifications and cGMPs. Patheon will give Client all stability test data and results at Client’s request.