Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(59)
Sulfur removal averaged 34% of input concentration.
For NGF, the same experimental configuration was estimated to create an input concentration ranging from 0.04 to 0.4 nM for different cylinder hydrogels.
The horizontal diffusion in the SOURCE layer was estimated to render an input concentration ranging from 5 × 10−3 to 0.2 nM for different cylinder hydrogels after 12 h diffusion.
The model is a development of earlier work[1] which considered the response to input concentration changes.
Based on a simple estimate of sulphate input concentration, a half-life of about 15 years has been estimated for sulphate reduction.
Column studies eliminated the additional uncertainty inherent in determining the input concentration for TCE, by assessing the retardation coefficient in relation to an inorganic tracer.
A pulse of the AgNP suspension with an input concentration (C0) of 50 mg L−1 was injected into the columns for 3 pore volumes.
For a given sand and colloid, increasing the input concentration produced less deposition and higher mass recovery in the effluent, especially for coarser sands and smaller colloids.
The height of the SOURCE layer was sufficiently small (~400 µm) to ensure that the molecules spread in this layer just by diffusion to establish a horizontal gradient in the X Y plane, providing a gradually decreasing input concentration for each Matrigel cylinder within the suspended STENCIL layer.
Estimated from our simulation results, the horizontal diffusion of Sema3A in the SOURCE layer was estimated to give an input concentration ranging from 1 × 10−3 to 0.05 nM for different cylinder hydrogels after 12 h diffusion, effectively built up Sema3A gradient with a steepness ranging from 1 × 10-5 to 3.6 × 10-3 μm−1 (or 0.6 8.8%).
For this purpose, we propose the design of an observer of the input concentration which, coupled with a slightly different control law reminiscent of the one used in the case where the input concentration is known, guarantees the regulation of the output.
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