Suggestions(4)
Exact(7)
After generating QSI-derived axon diameter maps, diameters were calculated using histology from seven WM tracts (dorsal corticospinal, gracilis, cuneatus, rubrospinal, spinothalamic, reticulospinal, and vestibulospinal tracts) each with different axon diameters.
In order to determine physically formed relations between bubble characteristics and physicochemical properties of the liquid employed, bubble size distributions and average bubble diameters were calculated using a simplified version of the theoretical model developed by Prince and Blanch (A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 36 (10 199090) 1485 1499).
Crown diameters were calculated using the model for Fagus sylvatica (Pretzsch [1992]) in the absence of species-specific models for afrotemperate forests.
The inputs included the absorbance values of the as-prepared samples at 530 nm, and the corresponding diameters were calculated using a trial version of the ImageJ software.
The average nanofiber diameters were calculated using the software Innerview 2.0, Dong, Bundang Daeduk Plaza, Korea, after measuring 100 diameters per sample from FE-SEM images.
Pore surface areas and pore diameters were calculated using the BJH method (Barrett, Joyner and Halenda).
Similar(53)
CSA of fiber diameters was calculated using the outline spline function on the Axiovision 4.5 software.
On the segmented optical pores, parameters such as area, feret diameters, roundness, pore aspect and pore throat diameter were calculated using Fiji software.
The percentage differences between the actual sphere diameter and the derived sphere diameter were calculated using a different threshold from each PET measured volume.
The total tumour area and the necrotic tumour area through the maximum diameter were calculated using Image J software (NIH, http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/), and the percentage of the necrotic area was calculated.
Average pore diameter was calculated using the Barret-Joyner-Halenda (BJH) model from the desorption isotherm.
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