Sentence examples for comparisons between clusters from inspiring English sources

18 of 30 age comparisons between clusters were significant.

They are thus best suited for comparisons between clusters with similar sizes since they are dependent on sequence abundances.

Clusters were subsequently compared on variables of interest using analysis of variance, followed by pairwise comparisons between clusters when the omnibus test was significant (that is, P <0.05).

All correlations between the clusters are <0.80 and only 31 of 703 pair-wise comparisons between clusters have correlations >0.70, demonstrating a high degree of separation between the clusters.

Pairwise comparisons between clusters also showed significant differences in all cases, except for the following: cluster 1 versus cluster 2 in regard to GAD-7 (P = 0.96) and PHQ-9 (P = 0.07) and cluster 3 versus cluster 4 with respect to PHQ-9 (P = 0.53).

Pairwise comparisons between clusters also showed significant differences in all cases, except for the following: cluster 2 versus cluster 3 MOS-Sleep Problems Index II (P = 0.16) and cluster 1 versus cluster 2 with respect to both POMS Tension-Anxiety (P = 0.26) and Depression-Dejection (P = 0.23).

Comparisons between clustering trees inferred from both indirect and direct DNA sequence analysis techniques would provide a better assessment of the true species relationships.

Third, a standard set of Representative Proteomes (RPs) would enable the scientific community to make direct comparison between clusters and annotations produced by various methods.

For example, every pairwise comparison between clusters should be informative as well as their holistic interpretation, foreshadowing the utility of this methodology for exploratory data analysis.

The annotation of genes was performed using the program Blast2GO (http://www.blast2go.org/), which provides a comparison between clusters of sequences obtained from public databases.

Clusters 2 and 3 were significantly different from one another (paired t test, t6 = 2.476, p = 0.048), but no other pairwise comparison between clusters was statistically different (paired t tests, 1 vs. 2: t6 = -1.138, p = 0.299; 1 vs 3: t6 = 1.341, p = 0.228).