Sentence examples for apparatus settings from inspiring English sources

Such a causal hypothesis will be difficult to reconcile with the common belief that apparatus settings are controllable at experimenters' will, and thus could be set independently of the pair's state at the source.

One possible explanation is that pairs' states and apparatus settings share a common cause, which always correlates certain types of pairs' states λ with certain types of L- and R-setting.

Another possible explanation for the failure of λ-independence is that the apparatus settings influence the pair's state at the source, and accordingly the distribution of the possible pairs' states λ is dependent upon the settings.

In particular, one can construct a big-probability space in which the conditional probabilities of outcomes, given a pair's state and apparatus settings, are equal to the corresponding unconditional probabilities in the many-spaces approaches: P xl & yr / λ & l & r) = Pλ l r xl & yr), P xl′ & yr / λ & l′ & r) = Pλ l′ r xl′ & yr), etc.

Furthermore, thinking of all the different ways one can measure spin properties and the variety of ways in which apparatus settings can be chosen, the postulation of such common cause explanation for settings and pairs' states would seem highly ad hoc and its existence conspiratorial.

The first is to postulate that pairs' states and apparatus settings share a common cause, which correlates certain types of pairs' states with certain types of settings (e.g. states of type λ1 are correlated with settings of type l and r, whereas states of type λ2 are correlated with settings of type l′ and r′, etc).

For example, letting l and l′ be different L-apparatus settings, the probability Pλ l r xl & yr) belongs to one probability space, whereas the probability Pλ l′ r xl′ & yr) belongs to another.

Safeguard against malfunction is obtained by duplication or triplication; parallel computer systems are arranged to examine electronic route-setting commands in different ways, and only if automatic comparison shows no discrepancy in their proof that conflicting routes have been secured will the apparatus set the required route.

Both tasks were performed in the scanning room but outside the scanner apparatus, providing settings close to laboratory conditions.

An influence of particular dynamics of the coupled tanks apparatus on controller settings and control system behavior is studied.

Diverse levels of sensitivity of occupant behavior on control-based activities such as using lighting apparatus, adjusting thermostat settings, and presence in space are employed through three diverse occupant behavior patterns.