The phrase "assuming a factor of" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing calculations, estimations, or conditions that rely on a specific variable or multiplier.
Example: "Assuming a factor of two for the growth rate, we can predict the population will double in the next decade."
Alternatives: "considering a factor of" or "taking into account a factor of".
Further, the EFSA Panel assumed a factor of 2.85 based on data from Hungary [38] to infer to Urtica leaf pollen density.
To account for inhomogeneous deposition of pollen on leaves, including that of aggregation processes, Perry et al. [7] assumed a factor of 12 for a 99%% confidence interval (CI) around mean pollen densities; for worst-case field scenario assumptions, they estimated a mean pollen density of approximately 599 n/cm2 on nettle leaves and a daily mean density of 85 n/(cm2 day) [8, Appendix I].
We assumed a factor of 1.7 (Stern and Smith 2003) in estimating the corresponding adult blood mercury level of 12 µg/L.
We suspect that it is considerably more resistant than the boundary between grey and white matter (where we have assumed a factor of 5 difference in motility).
We assumed a factor of 1.0 for converting the absorption coefficient to EC mass [ 25, 26], which was then divided by the sampled air volume to calculate average EC exposure concentration [ 24].
We assumed a factor of 1 based on calibration factors reported in other studies examining air pollution in urban settings (Cyrys et al. 2003; Kinney et al. 2000) and on our own results of TOR EC measurements on 30, co-located quartz filters [see Supplemental Material (available online at http://www.ehponline.org/members/2009/0800335/suppl.pdf)].
Typical results are around 90 days per 10 μg/m3 of PM10 (assuming a factor 0.6 for the conversion from PM2.5 to PM10).
WINDOX 5 software was used assuming a shape factor of 1.00, density of 1.019 g/cm, and Mie analysis mode to calculate a volume mean diameter (VMD) and geometric standard deviation (GSD).
The difference of perceived privacy risk compared to sharing the private information with 1,001 persons instead would have been marginal.Continuing the worked example introduced previously and assuming a weight factor of 2, the privacy relevance of Jane's audience size of 150 friends is calculated as follows: f 1 ( c 1 ) = 2 ∗ 1 − e 150 ∗ ln ( 0.5 ) 150 = 1.
The FDA trigger corresponds to a PEC in surface water of 0.1 μg/L, assuming a dilution factor of 10, and is calculated from manufacturers' sales estimates.
