Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(4)
With the MUSIC dataset, UBGW almost always outperforms UBSW, although differences between results by both algorithms are small.
Note that from the results in Table 2, the computation resources consumed by both algorithms are approximately the same, thus ensuring a fair comparison between both methods.
The simulation examples in Section 5 show that the distortion achieved by both algorithms are extremely close and the performance gap between the full-optimization and the successive approximation based algorithms is virtually negligible. .
Sequence logos representing the motifs discovered by both algorithms are shown in Figure 2. Similar improvements in performance are also seen for the E. coli FruR and RscB motifs.
Similar(56)
It should be mentioned that, both algorithms are coded by Matlab 8.2.0.701 (R2013b) software to complete the process of comparison.
Both algorithms are inspired by the linear-memory algorithm for Baum-Welch training which requires only a uni-directional rather than bi-directional movement along the input sequence and which has the added advantage of being considerably easier to implement.
The voice-tag created by both algorithms is a set of phonetic strings that require very low storage, making them suitable for embedded platforms.
The structures generated by both algorithms were identical.
Finally, the data predicted by both algorithms were combined and the overlaps were calculated.
However, the average PCCs of the biclusters by both algorithms were very low.
Only peaks called by both algorithms were used for the analysis.
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