As picture, the duration column has strange number. Is this normal behavior?

# Tag: Linear algebra

## insert/update/delete multiple tables in single SQL statement

### Related:

## CATPCA Cronbach’s alpha scores: interpretation

In the example included on the SPSS info page (https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLVMB_sub/spss/tutorials/catpca_guttman_dim.html) the alpha score for dimension 2 is .315. Yet with an Eigenvalue of 1.337 this dimension still adds explained variance to the two-dimensional model (total alpha score = .986).

How to interpret this? Does a low alpha score for dim 2 ( 1). So should users only look at Eigenvalues of the dimensions and the Total Cronbach’s alpha (or Eigenvalue/Explained variance) of the overall model? In my own current research using CATPCA I encounter similar output.

### Related:

## 15 nodes TSP problem in cplexlsqnonnegmilpex.m(Matlab)

[cplexlsqnonnegmilpex][1] is not able to solve this problem with low gap value. And reaching solution takes a long time. (approximately 2 hours)

How can I solve this problem with low gap value within a short time?

I attached the code and the result [link text][2]of the problem at the end of the run to this box.

Thanks in advance.

[1]: /answers/storage/temp/18771-cplexlsqnonnegmilpex-problem.txt

[2]: /answers/storage/temp/18772-15noderesults.txt

### Related:

## Custom constraint issue-ILOG

Anyone else encounter this? The following code demonstrates the issue and is mostly copied verbatim from the extensions manual (LEConstraint).

import ilog.cp.*;

import ilog.concert.*;

public class Runner {

public static void main(String[] args) {

try {

IloCP cp = new IloCP();

IloIntVar a = cp.intVar(2, 10);

IloIntVar y = cp.intVar(2, 10);

cp.add(new LEConstraint(cp, a, y));

cp.add(cp.minimize(a));

cp.solve();

} catch (IloException e) {

}

}

}

class LEConstraint extends IloCustomConstraint {

private IloIntVar _x;

private IloIntVar _y;

public LEConstraint(IloCP cp, IloIntVar x, IloIntVar y) throws IloException {

super(cp);

_x = x;

_y = y;

addVar(x);

addVar(y);

}

public void execute() {

if (isFixed(_x) && isFixed(_y))

if (getValue(_x) > getValue(_y))

setValue(_x, getValue(_x)+1);

}

}

Resulting in:

! Search terminated , no solution found.

! Number of branches : 0

! Number of fails : 0

! Total memory usage : 2.3 MB (2.3 MB CP Optimizer + 0.0 MB Concert)

! Time spent in solve : 0.01s (0.01s engine + 0.00s extraction)

! Search speed (br. / s) : 0

@Xavier Nodet

### Related:

## Interaction contrast for within-subject variable in mixed design

D: 6 levels, between Ss

C: 2 levels, within Ss

I need to test the effect of C at D3.

Here is what I thought the correct syntax should be:

GLM C1 C2 BY D

/WSFACTOR=time 2 Polynomial

/METHOD=SSTYPE(3)

/CRITERIA=ALPHA(.05)

/WSDESIGN=time

/DESIGN=D

/LMATRIX “locate contrast at D3 ” D 0 0 1 0 0 0;

/MMATRIX “effect of C” all 1 -1.

I get this error: “This L matrix is not estimable. Hypothesis tests cannot be computed.”

Question: The LMATRIX code must be wrong. What should the correct LMATRIX line be?