Table 2 Optimal parameters for 3-DoS flexure model Beam orientation θ Two end points distance a (mm) Interval distance d (mm) Radius of beam r (mm) (theta = {uppi mathord{left/ {vphantom {uppi 4}} right. kern-0pt} 4}) 200 200 5 Open image in new window Figure 17 Simulation for optimal design.
In order to alleviate those problems, we extend the end-point distance and the min-region distance into the extended end-point distance and the segmented min-region distance, respectively, and combine them into a novel measure, the extended point-region distance.
First, we propose three basic filtering measures (the end-point distance, the min-region distance, and the interim time-warping distance) based on the ones appeared in the literature, and one of their direct combinations (the point-region distance).
We used the shape descriptor defined as the ratio of the end-point distance to the length of the skeleton.
Secondary end points included distance walked in 6 minutes and health-related quality of life.
Efficiency of flights was calculated by dividing the straight line distance between start and end point by the actual distance travelled.
Distances between breakpoints and features were found by measuring the minimal distance between the end points or the distance between midpoints of the breakpoint and feature (see fig. 1 C and Methods).
It is of note here that the directionality of cell movements, being the ratio of the direct distance from start to end point to the total migrated distance, was similar for all tested cell lines (data not shown).
The collected end point data were the distance and the time run by each mouse.
The minimal end point method gives a distance of zero to features falling at least partially within a breakpoint (fig. 1 C ).
