Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(2)
The results revealed that both platforms were highly comparable with a high correlation coefficient of 0.88 (Table S3).
We looked at the genes that we had previously identified (using RNA sequencing) as being differentially expressed during one of the two infections, and found that the measurements from both platforms were highly correlated (0.81 Pearson's correlation).
Similar(58)
Those platforms were highly accessible, easy to use, and free.
Using a new approach to map probes across platforms, we found that the genes in the signatures from the two platforms were highly similar, and that the predictions they generated were also strongly correlated.
Statistical comparison indicated that results obtained from the two platforms were highly comparable.
The differences in coverage between platforms were highly conserved across chromosomes.
One of the major observations from this study is that the data from all platforms were highly reproducible.
In conclusion, the results obtained with ELISA and xMAP platforms were highly correlated and its validity is very similar.
While the two transcriptomic platforms were highly correlated with each other, neither platform was an accurate predictor of protein abundance in general.
While the average absolute fold-change increased to certain degree for most of platforms, the relative differences between platforms were highly conserved.
The GSOA results for these two platforms were highly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.909 for AUC values, 0.728 for P values, see Fig. 3).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com