Sentence examples similar to evaluated as a label from inspiring English sources

The synthesis of an improved terthiophene monomer functionalized with acrylic acid and a methylhydroxy group, 3-[3′,3‴-bis(hydroxymethyl -2′:2″,5″:2‴-terthydroxymethyl -2′E)acrylic acid, (HTAA), and its electropolymerization into a conducting polymer is described and evaluated as a label-free DNA sensor.

Task-based interface design principles (TBI) were evaluated as a framework for designing effective nutritional labels.

Cell membrane integrity was evaluated as a measure of viability using YO-PRO-1 DNA stain (Invitrogen) that labels apoptotic cells.

This peptide was labeled with 68Ga and further evaluated as an imaging agent for PET imaging [37, 39].

Each label assignment in the pool is first evaluated as an output candidate, then selected with uncertainty for privacy consideration.

The extent of membrane tumor cells staining was semiquantitatively evaluated as 0 (no labelling or labelling in <10% of tumor cells); 1 (labelling in 10% to 24% of tumor cells); 2 (labelling in 25%to49%9% of tumor cells); 3 (labelling in 50%to74%4% of tumor cells); and 4 (labelling in 75% or more of tumor cells).

The resultant classifier can be presented as a cascading filters system (see Figure 1): compounds evaluated as positive by SVM are immediately labelled mutagenic, whereas the presumed negatives are further sifted through two consecutive checkpoints for SAs with rising sensitivity.

This hypothesis is currently being evaluated as part of 2 multicenter, open label randomized trials (MONET and MONOI), both recruiting patients who are stable on antiretroviral medication with an undetectable baseline HIV load, aiming to prove non-inferiority of DRV/r monotherapy versus standard HAART given as 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) together with DRV/r.

The details about the two datasets are presented in Supplementary Material 3. The datasets used in our experiments are provided with labels; therefore, the clustering performance is evaluated as comparing the automatic partitions with the labels using adjusted rand index (ARI; Hubert and Arabie, 1985) and normalized mutual information (NMI; Strehl and Ghosh, 2002).

The immunohistochemical labeling was evaluated as previously described [ 28].

Incorporation yields of the labeled peptide were evaluated as described previously.