{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01680672268907563, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.067796610169491, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Examination of Alternative Heteroscedastic Error Structures Using Experimental Data

Abstract Impacts of alternative specifications for heteroscedastic error structures are examined by estimating various production functions for corn in Central Texas. Production- and profit-maximizing levels of inputs and the shape of the profit equation obtained from models not corrected for heteroscedasticity differed from those obtained from models corrected for heteroscedasticity. Using the profit-maximizing input levels for each production function gave essentially the same estimated yield and profit, regardless of the specification for heteroscedasticity employed. Differences of up to one-quarter to one-third are noted, however, in the amount of profit-maximizing levels of inputs used, depending on the heteroscedasticity correction.