Sentence examples for between methods was small from inspiring English sources

In some target panels, the difference between methods was small; for example, IMPUTE2 was only slightly more accurate than Beagle in the CEU and TSI panels, which is consistent with previous results comparing these methods on a European dataset (Howie et al. 2009).

The assessment suggests that the homotypic approach with multiple genomes performs best for Ey, although the differences between methods are small in the high specificity range in which we are interested (data not shown).

On model M1, differences between methods were small, and in general all methods had very good accuracy.

The observation that differences between methods were small compared to their standard errors was also reported by Luan et al. [ 14] and Hayes et al. [ 2].

For example, González-Recio and Forni (2011) developed versions of BayesA, Bayesian Lasso, and two machine-learning methods for analyzing dichotomous traits and showed that the differences between methods are small, particularly with a large number of quantitative trait loci.

Differences between methods were small but the ranking of methods depended on π and heritability; with high π or high heritability, methods that weighted markers differentially (BayesA and BayesCπ) had the highest accuracy, while GBLUP had the highest accuracy for traits with low π or low heritability.

The difference of relative errors between the two methods was small (0.54 0.68%) compared to the uncertainty associated to the standard method (± 3%).

It should be noted that the difference between the two methods was small and similar to what has been found for repeated infusion protocols [ 12, 15, 16], therefore one has to be careful with regard to any clinical implications.

Although the difference in accuracy between the three LDP SNP selection methods was small or absent, Methods 2 and 3 reduced the variation in imputation accuracy across SNPs (see Figure  2 and Additional file 5: Figure S2).

For non-chemical names, the difference between the two methods was smaller: although the maximum F-measure of the length-normalized edit distance was larger than that of SoftTFIDF, SoftTFIDF may be better if we prioritize precision.

When the variation between two methods is small compared to the variation between individuals, the correlation is mainly determined by the variation within the patient population.