Sentence examples for between these two subsets from inspiring English sources

The difference between these two subsets lies in nonkernel sentences being derived from kernel sentences by means of transformational rules.

Comparative analyses between these two subsets showed that in the steady state (IMEC WT) MYC occupancy was higher among the upregulated genes and it further increased in response to MYC overexpression (Fig. 3c and Supplementary Fig. 5c).

Independent t-tests were performed for clinical crown height and gingival margin-papillae to determine whether differences exist between these two subsets of teeth for these measurements.

We assume further that the pairwise similarities in the subset {C o u g h, F l u, A s t h m a} and in the subset {b r o k e n A r m, b r o k e n L e g} are higher than any similarity in between these two subsets.

Collectively, it would be interesting to further investigate the differences between these two subsets of macrophages and their role in acute and chronic wounds.

We next performed flow cytometry to examine if the difference in response between these two subsets was due to the expression of a different repertoire of Notch receptors.

The test for interaction between these two subset analyses revealed differences consistent with chance (χ=1.52, p=0.22).

Using the Wilcoxen Signed Rank test, there was no significant difference between the distributions of these two subsets of SDS items (z = 1.594, ns) for this most depressed subsample.

None of the Q-Q Plots showed any departure from normality for these data Using the Wilcoxen Signed Rank test, there was a significant difference between the distributions of these two subsets of SDS items (M Melancholia = 1.777, SD =.417; M Nonmelancholia = 1.721, SD =.508: z = 13.898, p <.001), with a small effect size (r =.17) for the total sample.

Nevertheless, no correlation was found between the percentages of Th17 and B10 cells in ITP patients (r = 0.201, P = 0.231), nor between the absolute numbers of these two subsets (r = 0.245, P = 0.156).

It was not initially clear why the patients with brain metastases originating from breast cancer outperformed the patients with NSCLC primary – the mean efaproxiral dose, mean number of administered doses, and mean extrapolated E-RBC between the respective exposure groups of these two subsets were not considerably different (Table 3).