Sentence examples for estimates when applying from inspiring English sources

A necessity for yielding unbiased estimates when applying propensity score matching is a thoroughly considered model based on which the propensity scores are estimated (see Shadish and Steiner [2010]; Bryson et al. [2002]; Smith and Todd [2005] f.

Moreover, it does not lead to improved parameter estimates when applying Aeff, which was the actual aim of introducing their modified model.

With randomly ascertained families, with or without population stratification, the prospective approach (modeling trait value given genotype) is found to be generally most effective, although the retrospective approach has some advantages with regard to estimation and interpretability of parameter estimates when applied to selected samples.

Being based on a Vandermonde decomposition of the prediction matrix, the matrix pencil method produces biased estimates when applied directly to data of the constant-Q model.

It is well known that subspace identification methods that assume open loop data without correlations between the input and noise, may give biased estimates when applied to closed loop data.

We found that the two methods yield indistinguishable estimates when applied to taxa whose limb proportions are similar to those of humans, but significantly different results when applied to taxa whose proportions differ from those of humans.

The third and fourth analyses show that the DDM and CCNM yield significantly different estimates when applied to fossil hominins with human-like body proportions and fossil hominins whose body proportions differ markedly from those of humans.

As we had assumed, other height and weight-based methods also produce inaccurate surface area estimates when applied to fossil taxa whose body proportions differ from those of humans.

The first two analyses demonstrate that the DDM and CCNM yield indistinguishable surface area estimates when applied to humans, regardless of whether the sample comprises just live individuals or both live individuals and skeletal specimens.

Thus, it appears that our finding that the DDM and CCNM yield significantly different estimates when applied to fossil hominins with body proportions that differ from those of humans is not peculiar to the DDM.

Given that the three limb proportion indices explain 86% of the variation in the differences between the DDM and CCNM estimates, the results of the regression analysis support the idea that the DDM yielded inaccurate estimates when applied to the fossil hominin sample because the latter included taxa with limb proportions that differ from those of humans.