Search

As is well known, the U. S. national accounts contain a "Statistical Discrepancy" which serves to reconcile estimates of GNP from the product and from the income side. While the Discrepancy is a measure only of overall consistency rather than of error, its magnitude and pattern over time (to give some indication of the quality of the nation:d accounts data. In the past, the Statistical Discrepancy has not always behaved as a quantitatively unimportant random error term--a disturbing sign with regard to the GNP statistics. The presence of a systematic Discrepancy also causes difficulties in some specific problems. For example, it is necessary to assume a value for the Discrepancy in the identities of an econometric model when forecasts are made. The Discrepancy can also seriously affect estimates involving those GNP categories, such as savings, which are customarily calculated as residuals with the consequence that the Discrepancy is allocated to them. Earlier studies of the Discrepancy by Gartaganis and Goldberger [3], and by de Janosi [2], have shown: (1) A positive mean value for the Statistical Discrepancy (in the 1929-1959 data, X=$485 million, and sigma=$1,515 million) (2) No significant evidence of non-normality (3) Some evidence of autocorrelation (4) A declining trend in the statistical discrepancy relative to GNP in the most recent data. The purpose of the present note is, first, to see how the Discrepancy has behaved since the completion of this earlier work and, specifically, to examine the Discrepancy in the 1965 revision of the United States national accounts statistics. Secondly, we will study the movement of the Discrepancy with respect to GNP and with respect to the main components of the national accounts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the findings of a study on the causes of sliver irregularity in wool-gilling. The study concluded that the gilling process involves two main different sources of disturbances, namely, the input irregularity, and the faller-bar action. A theoretical analysis has revealed that the resultant output irregularities are composed of two independent components corresponding to these two sources of disturbance. The study confirmed through a spectral analysis of the experimental data that the gilling process causes a considerable amount of additional irregularity to occur in the gilled sliver. Additional irregularity is mainly contributed by a periodic wave with a wavelength approximately equal to the pitch of the fallers times the front draft ratio.

A matter that has received scant attention in the literature of operations research is the role of discrepancies between physical stocks and stocks of record in a supply operation. Discrepancies not only exert a deleterious effect on the performance of the supply function, but may have a serious effect on the realization of benefits to be derived from implementation of theoretically optimal methods of inventory control and procurement or production scheduling. The present paper reports on a case study of discrepancies and their causes in a supply facility of an agency of the Federal Government Contrary to the general expectation that the massive and complex paper work system connected with processing of issues and receipts was the principal source of discrepancies, it was possible to determine that about 80 per cent of the discrepancies were caused by the discrepancy-correcting procedures themselves. As a result two principal targets for further study are clearly delineated, (1) the inventorying process and (2) the stock balance adjustment procedures. Even on the basis of preliminary study some ameliorating recommendations were possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on an article on discrepancies in trade statistics of trading partners. The article is a logical argument that discrepancies between recorded imports and exports might be large even without errors in recording. According to researchers, discrepancies are so large under the conditions of certain test cases that major errors must be presumed. Both arguments could be correct: they move on different tracks. The article continue a demonstration that reported export-import ratios can vary widely when the trading countries define origins and destinations differently. This logic is of course valid and was stated explicitly. Researchers conclude that high probabilities remain for major errors lying behind the major discrepancies observed. Individual commodities can be studied in detail, taking into account the volume and types of indirect trade and the definitions and valuations used, to ascertain more tightly whether individual discrepancies can reasonably be explained by the known causes.