Sentence examples for between the original datasets from inspiring English sources
There was a good correlation between the original datasets and the HYPR-LR post-processed datasets: r = 0.848 for ULD and ULD+HYPR and r = 0.933 for LD and LD+HYPR (p<0.0001 for both).
In both validation techniques, significant differences (which are visually apparent) were noted between the original datasets, datasets corrected using a single spline-fit and the datasets corrected using the proposed dual-spline fit process.
In order to do so, a correlation analysis between the original dataset and the resultant hierarchical clustering is performed through the calculation of the cophenetic coefficient [ 46].
However, this creates difficulties of interpretation, and other more theoretically grounded metrics that take into account the difference in the level of precision between the original dataset and the generalized data have been suggested [ 5].
Negligible differences in results were found when comparing the coefficients of the simplest specifications without macro-level variables of our model between the original dataset and our sample (results available upon request).
There was a good correlation between the mean attenuation values of the original datasets and the HYPR-LR-post-processed datasets for ULD vs. ULD+HYPR and LD vs. LD+HYPR, respectively (r = 0.848 and r = 0.933, p<0.0001).
Significant differences (p < 0.001) were noted between the artifact-corrected datasets and the original datasets, where the mean unsigned differences computed over 30 optic-nerve-head-centered scans (in normalized units) were 0.134 ± 0.035 and 0.302 ± 0.134, respectively.
Also, when expressions of genes are widely correlated in a disease, the POGR score between two gene lists randomly extracted from the original datasets may be high.
However, we found the hiPSCs-H poorly correlated with the original datasets; ρ = 0.31 between hiPSCs-L and hiPSCs-H; ρ = 0.07 between hiPSCs-H and hFibro-L.
The p-values, albeit approximate, indicate that the relationship between relative centering and intensity is highly significant in the original datasets and insignificant at a marginal level of 0.05 for all re-loessed datasets save 10e.
