Simple comparisons of representations showed the following order of RTs: I-I>E-I>E-E (smallest F 1, 11) = 18.43 with largest p < 0.001).
Simple comparisons of representations showed that there were significantly more errors for E-I than for E-E (F 1, 24) = 8.96, p<0.01), but there were no significant differences in errors between E-I and I-I and between I-I and E-E.
The formulation is illustrated by application to a couple of typical offshore frame structures, and comparison of different representations of the plastic effects illustrates the importance of a robust element with realistic representation of the cyclic plastic mechanisms.
Therefore, the comparison of neural representations of trained and untrained sequences after learning will reveal correlates of the sequence-specific rather than general skill acquired during learning.
The comparison of taxon representation at a particular day to the representation on day 0, i.e. prior to antibiotic therapy, was evaluated by a t-test using SPSS v.14 statistical software.
Figure 2 Comparison of MOL representation with systematic identifiers.
This paper presents a simple comparison of the representation of domestic cattle, sheep/goats and horses from geographically distinct regions.
These variables included the free surface and the capture of quadrupole noise sources, as well as a comparison of propeller representation approaches.
Comparison of EST representation and microarray data show substantial inconsistencies in identification of (i) highly abundant expressed genes and (ii) life-cycle stage-specific or -biased expression.
Constituent comparisons of propositional representations were hypothesized in the mental model of sentence processing.
