The phrase "a good precision of" is not correct in standard written English.
It is typically used when discussing the accuracy or exactness of a measurement or result, but the adjective "good" is not commonly paired with "precision."
Example: "The experiment demonstrated a high precision of the results, indicating reliability in the measurements taken."
Alternatives: "a high level of precision" or "a strong degree of precision."
The RSD value (2.27%, n=24) indicated a good precision of the analytical method.
The R.S.D. value (0.45%, n = 24) indicated a good precision of the analytical method.
Intra-and inter-day relative standard deviations were below 7.6%, indicating a good precision of the proposed method.
The sensor shows a good precision of 1.2% (n = 3) at 10−12 mol dm−3 of nitrate.
A good precision of CFCA, ∼8% (n = 21), was demonstrated when this method was used to efficiently guide purification procedures of Interferon α-2a.
A good precision of the whole procedure (2.0 and 2.3%), high enrichment factors (20.5 and 11.8) and a detection limit of 0.011 and 0.25 μg g−1 for cadmium and lead, respectively, were obtained for 80 mg of sample.
Our main findings suggest a good precision for RSA measurements of translations in the calcaneal osteotomy and the CC joint with calcaneal lengthenings – as measured on the lateral side of the osteotomy – from 0 cm to approximately 1.5 cm.
In this model, a lower value of 2.32 for the coefficient of variation (CV), suggested a good precision and reliability of the experiment.
The latter two approaches, assuming surface and volumetric reaction kinetics respectively, predict with a good precision the yields of the different product families obtained in an industrial FCC unit showing a slight improvement from a conventional heterogeneous reactor model with a monodispersed distribution.
At the same time, the relatively low values of the coefficient of variation (CVCOD = 1.22, CVTur = 2.57 and CVSVI = 8.41) indicate a good precision and reliability of the experiments (Nakano and Jutan 1994; Collins et al. 2009).
A low CV of 2.21% suggested a good precision and higher reliability of the models to predict experimental results.
