Rozdíly

Zde můžete vidět rozdíly mezi vybranou verzí a aktuální verzí dané stránky.

Odkaz na výstup diff

Obě strany předchozí revize Předchozí verze
en:pochybeni_dle_uohs [2020/01/19 15:05]
Jiří Skuhrovec
en:pochybeni_dle_uohs [2020/01/19 15:08] (aktuální)
Jiří Skuhrovec
Řádek 30: Řádek 30:
 Indicator for an individual contract is assigned the value of 1 if OPC's ruling proved a case of serous misconduct and the value of 0 if not. Aggregate value for all contracts of a respective contracting authority is then computed as follows: Indicator for an individual contract is assigned the value of 1 if OPC's ruling proved a case of serous misconduct and the value of 0 if not. Aggregate value for all contracts of a respective contracting authority is then computed as follows:
  
-$$z_7 = 1 - \Bigg(\frac{4*number\:​of\:​serious\:​misconduct\:​cases}{number\:​of\:​contracts}\Bigg)$$+$$z_7 = 1 - \Bigg(\frac{4 ​\times ​number\:​of\:​serious\:​misconduct\:​cases}{number\:​of\:​contracts}\Bigg)$$
  
 Number of serious misconduct cases is a number of successful objections to the OPC against the contracting authority'​s actions, where the OPC proved serious misconduct in tendering procedure execution falling within our reference period. Number of contracts is the total number of contract award notices. Application of the overall fourth root enhances the effect of successful objections on the indicator value. Number of serious misconduct cases is a number of successful objections to the OPC against the contracting authority'​s actions, where the OPC proved serious misconduct in tendering procedure execution falling within our reference period. Number of contracts is the total number of contract award notices. Application of the overall fourth root enhances the effect of successful objections on the indicator value.
  • en/pochybeni_dle_uohs.txt
  • Poslední úprava: 2020/01/19 15:08
  • autor: Jiří Skuhrovec