Including Large Table that has 36 rows in a beamer frame

I have following table which I need to include in a beamer presentation :

I have read this post . I think I only need to adjust in this \begin{tabular}{*{27}{l}}. But I don't know how is to do that ?

EDIT: The data are given for convenience

            \begin{table}[H]
\scalebox{0.83}{
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\hline\hline
Number of groups & Group size & ICC & $\sigma_{u0}$ & $\sigma_{u1}$ & $\sigma_{e}$ & $\gamma_{00}$ & $\gamma_{10}$ & $\gamma_{01}$ & $\gamma_{11}$\\
\hline
20&5&0.1&-14.148&-13.132&-1.192&0.144&-1.54&0.101&-2.211\\
&&0.2&-7.458&-6.056&-0.623&0.338&-2.493&-1.334&-0.41\\
&&0.3&-3.343&-5.748&-0.064&-0.537&-0.723&-1.062&-1.178\\
&30&0.1&-1.686&-2.538&0.108&-0.221&-0.092&-1.205&0.212\\
&&0.2&-2.005&-1.322&0.025&0.465&-0.306&1.103&1.336\\
&&0.3&-2.064&-0.757&-0.007&-0.104&-0.073&0.115&-0.918\\
&50&0.1&-0.471&-1.802&-0.048&0.009&-0.393&-0.132&0.788\\
&&0.2&-1.743&-1.44&-0.038&-0.036&-0.27&0.769&0.171\\
&&0.3&-1.668&-1.802&-0.064&0.412&-0.218&-3.267&0.704\\\hline
30&5&0.1&-11.024&-11.582&-0.384&0.248&-1.595&1.687&0.403\\
&&0.2&-4.3&-5.605&-0.489&0.129&-0.729&0.32&-0.175\\
&&0.3&-2.925&-2.841&-0.149&-0.274&0.399&-1.879&1.864\\
&30&0.1&-0.914&-2.001&0.009&-0.031&-0.669&0.153&0.338\\
&&0.2&-1.045&-1.358&0.028&0.475&-0.278&-0.423&-0.426\\
&&0.3&0.474&-1.353&-0.001&-0.084&-1.05&0.182&2.23\\
&50&0.1&-1.918&-1.096&0.035&-0.006&-0.231&-0.13&-0.047\\
&&0.2&-0.78&-1.054&-0.055&0.129&0.605&-0.64&-0.511\\
&&0.3&-0.773&-0.149&-0.005&0.089&-0.549&-1.367&-0.323\\\hline
50&5&0.1&-5.588&-6.893&-0.258&0.142&-0.603&0.648&0.936\\
&&0.2&-1.822&-3.774&-0.317&-0.235&1.606&0.2&-0.477\\
&&0.3&-1.756&-1.747&-0.037&-0.163&0.01&1.294&0.78\\
&30&0.1&-1.291&-0.731&0.079&-0.179&-0.513&0.285&-0.463\\
&&0.2&-0.622&-1.501&0.025&0.004&0.241&-0.292&-0.585\\
&&0.3&-0.151&-0.576&0.007&0.129&-0.662&0.451&-0.208\\
&50&0.1&-1.445&-0.773&-0.01&-0.097&-0.069&0.372&0.016\\
&&0.2&-1.353&-0.684&-0.014&0.193&-0.059&-0.673&0.46\\
&&0.3&-0.846&-0.733&0.002&0.14&0.228&0.04&0.195\\\hline
100&5&0.1&-3.752&-1.694&-0.232&0.028&0.738&0.14&-0.833\\
&&0.2&-0.051&-1.462&-0.177&-0.112&0.663&0.151&-0.936\\
&&0.3&-0.626&-0.797&-0.051&-0.011&-1.012&-0.172&-0.882\\
&30&0.1&-0.313&-0.018&0.019&0.003&-0.203&-0.366&-0.663\\
&&0.2&0.108&-0.5&-0.038&-0.066&0.248&-0.059&0.384\\
&&0.3&-0.073&0.018&-0.05&0.121&-0.151&-0.053&-0.142\\
&50&0.1&-0.25&-0.084&0.061&-0.03&-0.109&-0.68&0.125\\
&&0.2&-0.246&-0.383&-0.008&-0.064&-0.161&-0.08&-0.121\\
&&0.3&-0.044&-0.453&-0.043&0.148&0.126&-0.08&0.384\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{Tab:1}
\caption{The effect of number of groups, group size, and ICC on the relative bias $(\frac{\hat \theta-\theta}{\theta}\times 100)$ of estimates. }
\end{table}

• Have you tried to read such a table from 10 metres? And participants, if it is for a conference, are expected to read it? – Przemysław Scherwentke Aug 23 '15 at 13:25
• Please ask yourself: What might you achieve -- other than eliciting groans and complaints -- by projecting a table with 37 rows (don't forget to count the header row!) and 10 columns? What are the people in the audience supposed to focus on? What, specifically, about this table do you hope they will remember ten or twenty minutes after the end of the talk? Do you mainly want to be remembered as the guy (or gal?) who projected an immense but illegible table? – Mico Aug 23 '15 at 13:33
• @Mico I will only focus on some specific values. If I figure out those values in language , they may not understand how those values have come from ? – user81411 Aug 23 '15 at 14:09
• If you're only going to focus on some specific combinations of the number of groups, group size, and ICC (what's that?) values, do consider showing just those combinations, and nothing else. You can trust your audience to trust you that you were able to excerpt the important combinations. – Mico Aug 23 '15 at 14:23
• @Mico Could you please suggest me in that case what will be the title? – user81411 Aug 23 '15 at 14:25

When giving a presentation, do try to anticipate what the audience is supposed to take away from your talk. What do you want the members to remember ten minutes after the talk ends, let alone two days, or two weeks, after the talk has ended? Do you think there's any chance at all that they'll remember the contents of the full table? If the chance of this happening is zero, do not show the full table, period.

If you're planning on showing just a few, selected combinations of "number of groups", "group size", and "ICC" (whatever that may be), do consider showing the numbers that correspond to just these combinations rather than the entire table. (I'd also say that "just a few" means "no more than five".) A frame title that might be appropriate when showing certain selected combinations might be "Effects of selected combinations of number of groups, group size, and ICC on relative bias".

Suppose, though, that it's really essential to show the numbers corresponding to all 4x3x3=36 possible combinations -- possibly because this talk is a thesis defense, there's an off-chance that one or more of the examiners may have questions about specific combinations, and you can't anticipate with confidence what these combinations may be. If that's the case, I think the only way to proceed is to break up the big table into four separate parts, and to display the four parts in four separate frames. The following screenshot shows the first of the four such pages. Note that I suggest using well-spaced horizontal lines, using generous amounts of white-space, and aligning the numbers in columns 3 thru 9 on their respective decimal markers.

\documentclass{beamer}
\usepackage[parse-numbers=false]{siunitx}
\usepackage{tabularx,booktabs}
\newcolumntype{L}{>{\raggedright\arraybackslash}X}
\begin{document}
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Effects of number of groups, group size, and ICC on relative bias of estimates}

Relative bias of estimates: $100\times(\hat \theta-\theta)/\theta$

\bigskip
Case 1 of 4: Number of groups${}=20$

\setlength\tabcolsep{2.5pt}
\small
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{@{} Lc
*{2}{S[table-format=-2.3]}*{5}{S[table-format=-1.3]}@{}}
\toprule
Group size & ICC & {$\sigma_{u0}$} & {$\sigma_{u1}$} & {$\sigma_{e}$} & {$\gamma_{00}$} & {$\gamma_{10}$} & {$\gamma_{01}$} & {$\gamma_{11}$}\\
\midrule
5&0.1&-14.148&-13.132&-1.192&0.144&-1.54&0.101&-2.211\\
&0.2&-7.458&-6.056&-0.623&0.338&-2.493&-1.334&-0.41\\
&0.3&-3.343&-5.748&-0.064&-0.537&-0.723&-1.062&-1.178\\
30&0.1&-1.686&-2.538&0.108&-0.221&-0.092&-1.205&0.212\\
&0.2&-2.005&-1.322&0.025&0.465&-0.306&1.103&1.336\\
&0.3&-2.064&-0.757&-0.007&-0.104&-0.073&0.115&-0.918\\
50&0.1&-0.471&-1.802&-0.048&0.009&-0.393&-0.132&0.788\\
&0.2&-1.743&-1.44&-0.038&-0.036&-0.27&0.769&0.171\\
&0.3&-1.668&-1.802&-0.064&0.412&-0.218&-3.267&0.704\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Effects of number of groups, group size, and ICC on relative bias of estimates, continued}

Relative bias of estimates: $100\times(\hat \theta-\theta)/\theta$

\bigskip
Case 2 of 4: Number of groups${}=30$

\setlength\tabcolsep{2.5pt}
\small
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{@{} Lc
*{2}{S[table-format=-2.3]}*{5}{S[table-format=-1.3]}@{}}
\toprule
Group size & ICC & {$\sigma_{u0}$} & {$\sigma_{u1}$} & {$\sigma_{e}$} & {$\gamma_{00}$} & {$\gamma_{10}$} & {$\gamma_{01}$} & {$\gamma_{11}$}\\
\midrule
5&0.1&-11.024&-11.582&-0.384&0.248&-1.595&1.687&0.403\\
&0.2&-4.3&-5.605&-0.489&0.129&-0.729&0.32&-0.175\\
&0.3&-2.925&-2.841&-0.149&-0.274&0.399&-1.879&1.864\\
30&0.1&-0.914&-2.001&0.009&-0.031&-0.669&0.153&0.338\\
&0.2&-1.045&-1.358&0.028&0.475&-0.278&-0.423&-0.426\\
&0.3&0.474&-1.353&-0.001&-0.084&-1.05&0.182&2.23\\
50&0.1&-1.918&-1.096&0.035&-0.006&-0.231&-0.13&-0.047\\
&0.2&-0.78&-1.054&-0.055&0.129&0.605&-0.64&-0.511\\
&0.3&-0.773&-0.149&-0.005&0.089&-0.549&-1.367&-0.323\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Effects of number of groups, group size, and ICC on relative bias of estimates, continued}

Relative bias of estimates: $100\times(\hat \theta-\theta)/\theta$

\bigskip
Case 3 of 4: Number of groups${}=50$

\setlength\tabcolsep{2.5pt}
\small
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{@{} Lc
*{2}{S[table-format=-2.3]}*{5}{S[table-format=-1.3]}@{}}
\toprule
Group size & ICC & {$\sigma_{u0}$} & {$\sigma_{u1}$} & {$\sigma_{e}$} & {$\gamma_{00}$} & {$\gamma_{10}$} & {$\gamma_{01}$} & {$\gamma_{11}$}\\
\midrule
5&0.1&-5.588&-6.893&-0.258&0.142&-0.603&0.648&0.936\\
&0.2&-1.822&-3.774&-0.317&-0.235&1.606&0.2&-0.477\\
&0.3&-1.756&-1.747&-0.037&-0.163&0.01&1.294&0.78\\
30&0.1&-1.291&-0.731&0.079&-0.179&-0.513&0.285&-0.463\\
&0.2&-0.622&-1.501&0.025&0.004&0.241&-0.292&-0.585\\
&0.3&-0.151&-0.576&0.007&0.129&-0.662&0.451&-0.208\\
50&0.1&-1.445&-0.773&-0.01&-0.097&-0.069&0.372&0.016\\
&0.2&-1.353&-0.684&-0.014&0.193&-0.059&-0.673&0.46\\
&0.3&-0.846&-0.733&0.002&0.14&0.228&0.04&0.195\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Effects of number of groups, group size, and ICC on relative bias of estimates, last page}

Relative bias of estimates: $100\times(\hat \theta-\theta)/\theta$

\bigskip
Case 4 of 4: Number of groups${}=100$

\setlength\tabcolsep{2.5pt}
\small
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{@{} Lc
*{2}{S[table-format=-2.3]}*{5}{S[table-format=-1.3]}@{}}
\toprule
Group size & ICC & {$\sigma_{u0}$} & {$\sigma_{u1}$} & {$\sigma_{e}$} & {$\gamma_{00}$} & {$\gamma_{10}$} & {$\gamma_{01}$} & {$\gamma_{11}$}\\
\midrule
5&0.1&-3.752&-1.694&-0.232&0.028&0.738&0.14&-0.833\\
&0.2&-0.051&-1.462&-0.177&-0.112&0.663&0.151&-0.936\\
&0.3&-0.626&-0.797&-0.051&-0.011&-1.012&-0.172&-0.882\\