The phrase "alignment is accurate" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when discussing the precision or correctness of alignment in various contexts, such as technical, design, or data analysis.
Example: "After reviewing the measurements, I can confirm that the alignment is accurate, ensuring the project will proceed smoothly."
Alternatives: "alignment is precise" or "alignment is correct".
Multiple alignment is more accurate than a series of pair-wise alignments and this allows for Sn to be extended to include additional fully conserved residues.
If you relax the standards for choosing TDFs, however, you compromise the reliability of the selected TDFs and the resulting peak alignment is less accurate.
For most (57 of 71), the alignment is impressively accurate; however, a number of the junctions are slightly misaligned and thus do not appear to map precisely to the annotated intron.
With more high identity homologs and increased sequence and structural annotation, pairwise alignments can provide essential insights to the function of novel proteins, but only if the alignment boundaries are accurate.
This method of alignment has been accurate in determining the crystallographic directions precisely with an accuracy as high as 0.01°.
As the mapping of a read to a location in the reference genome may not be accurate, many alignment tools report a mapping quality score as an indicator of the likelihood that the mapping is accurate.
The degree of consistency represents an upper-bound on the information a method can provide about homologous relationships: consistency is necessary but not sufficient for alignments to be accurate in this regard.
Alignment is usually more accurate when carried out using fiducial markers because of their high contrast, but they can obscure parts of the sample through shadowing effects.
A match in an alignment is not an accurate indicator of either purifying selection or functionality of that site, since non-functional sites under neutral evolution can remain unchanged by vertical inheritance or multiple/reverse mutation.
The overall CT alignment was highly accurate with true surface contact in 90% (84%; 100%) of the control points.
