Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(3)
(f) Normalized frequency distribution of the dot radius obtained for the image in (b).
The normalized frequency distribution of the dot radius for that image is shown in Figure 1f, giving an average dot radius r = 52 ± 4 nm for this fluence (Φ = 1 × 1018 cm−2); a mean dot height h = 46 ± 13 nm and a lateral spacing l = 146 ± 18 nm were found from similar evaluations.
However, further reduction of the treatment (30min) resulted in a different distribution of the dot plots obtained by flow cytometry.
Similar(57)
The distribution of the dots in the path of the URL for phishing URL is plotted in Fig. 10.
However, this method has the disadvantages of high densities and random distribution of the dots, making patterned arrangements difficult to achieve and limiting coupling to vertical stacks of SAQDs.
The samples with InAs coverage of 1.80 and 1.85 MLs show nearly unimodal size distribution of the dots having a dot diameter and average height of about 30 nm ± 5% and 3.0 nm ± 5%, 30 nm ± 5% and 3.9 nm ± 5%, respectively.
The distribution of the dots was pseudorandom, though they did not touch or overlap.
The spatial distribution of the dots was varied pseudo-randomly, equating the extrinsic and intrinsic properties of the stimuli (i.e. total luminance and item size) similar to the stimuli used in previous number comparison studies [22], [23], [53], [54], [61].
To address the role of Nup98-HoxA9, we first characterized in detail the intranuclear distribution of these dots.
In order to evaluate as much as possible the morphological architecture of the glandular distribution of the silver dots, we have next performed a fractal analysis of the skeleton-filter images extracted from the repartition of the nucleolar organizers.
The hydrodynamic diameter and size distribution of the quantum dots were determined by dynamic light scattering (DLS) using a standard laboratory built light scattering spectrometer using a BI90 particle sizer (Brookhaven Instruments Corp., Holtsville, NY).
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