The phrase "alignment preference" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where you are discussing someone's or something's preferred way of aligning with certain standards, values, or goals.
Example: "In our team meetings, we often discuss our alignment preference to ensure everyone is on the same page regarding project objectives."
Alternatives: "alignment choice" or "preferred alignment".
Even when none of the resources mentioned above are used in the alignment set-up a few simple heuristics are still applied, such as a cognate test (where similar strings are rewarded) and a strategy that the same parts-of-speech category in both the source and target candidate contribute to alignment preferences.
It was also edited slightly towards a consensus structural alignment in preference to an evolutionarily correct alignment where there was ambiguity between structural conservation and homology.
With this in mind, it seems very striking that the functional architecture of V1 should rely on a structure, the "association field" (see [13], Chap. 4) and its condition of "coaxial alignment" of orientation preferences, which simultaneously uses Euclidean geometry at several of these levels.
A score matrix is used to evaluate the possible ways of creating these alignments, with preference given to exact matches or chemically feasible mismatches, and to contiguous gaps.
A profile is single-peaked if the alternatives can be aligned from 'left' to 'right' (e.g., on some cognitive or ideological dimension) such that each individual has a most preferred position on that alignment with decreasing preference as alternatives get more distant (in either direction) from the most preferred position.
Advance care planning (ACP) improves alignment between patient preferences for life-sustaining treatment and care received at end of life (EOL).
The principle behind this model is that there is a lack of alignment of the preferences (interests) of the principal (employer) and the agent (employee) when it comes to the goals to be achieved by an organization.
The rectangular bounds suggest a negative preference for alignments between 40° and 50°.
This Article introduces just such an interest: the alignment of voters' policy preferences with their government's policy outputs.
