Sentence examples for considerably smaller confidence from inspiring English sources

Noteworthy, Bayesian modeling gave rise to parameter estimates with in many cases considerably smaller confidence intervals compared to the gold standard approach (Table 5).

In contrast, PATHd8 generated considerably younger dates with much smaller confidence intervals, despite using the same bootstrapped phylograms and fossil constraints as r8s.

In contrast, the OLS crude estimate of ψ0 was 1.70 for Y* (95% confidence interval: 0.426, 2.97) and was considerably smaller than the COCA estimate of 4.14 (95% confidence interval: 0.08, 8.19).

In contrast, since the VFQ-25 and the large print format were introduced more recently, sample size was considerably smaller for these comparisons and some 95% confidence intervals overlapped ± 0.2 SD.

Poisson regression estimates of 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were considerably smaller than the MC results, which allow for extra-Poisson uncertainties due to reconstructed doses and the background thyroid cancer incidence.

The 95% confidence interval of Ea was considerably smaller, which demonstrated that more precise estimates can be obtained from all data instead of selected data points in the linear range.

If the sample were based on 480 patients rather than just 48, then the SE would be considerably smaller (SE = 2.0/v480 = 0.09) and the 95% confidence interval (9.72 to 10.08 g/dl) would be correspondingly narrower.

Confidence intervals recovered from the data set were considerably smaller than those obtained from the null hypothesis (Table 3), suggesting that the data set contained an appreciable amount of information to support the results.

Nonetheless, this approach is not optimal in measuring the confidence of N-linked glycopeptide matches, because the glycopeptide data set is considerably smaller compared to that of peptides, and the requirement of a consensus sequence for N-glycosylation further limits the number of possible decoy glycopeptides tested in a database search.

Few relevant differences could be established with confidence in unigenes potentially specific for roots, probably owing to their significantly smaller number, likely determined by the considerably smaller number of reads obtained from this tissue.

So the payoffs feel considerably smaller.