Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(5)
R Square and Root mean square standard deviation were used to determine the number of clusters.
Absolute precision error (root mean square standard deviation: RMS-SD) were 0.980 dB·MHz-1·cm-1, 3.807 m·s-1 and 1.306 for nBUA, SOS and STI, respectively.
Although units of measurement were different in each method, comparison of these true measures using the root mean square standard deviation (RMS SD) shown in Figure 3 indicates that deviation for the LPC and RET were similar for the same sites, except for the tibia where the LPC was higher than all other measures.
Within the context of longitudinal studies of serial BMD measurements, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry recommends the calculation of the precision error (root mean square standard deviation, RMS SD in g/m, or coefficient of variation, CV%) and the least significant change (LSC = CV% × 2.77) [ 50].
For the repeated breast scans, a root mean square standard deviation of 2.5 and a correlation of 0.975 were achieved.
Similar(55)
The accuracy of the candidate correlations are performed in terms of the two widely used statistical indicators, mean bias and root mean square errors; standard deviation, standard error and F-test, were also introduced.
Figures 6 and 7 show the average error, the root mean square error, standard deviation, and finally the R-square error and to highlight the accuracy of different techniques.
Root mean square error (RMSE): Standard deviation between the real and predicted values via regression.
The standard (mean square root) deviation of the model from the data is found to be around 14%.
The closest point root mean square error (RMSE) and standard deviation for surface registration was 0.69 mm ± 0.42 mm.
Root mean square roughness (rms): the standard deviation of the surface roughness measurements relative to mean plane of all the data.
More suggestions(3)
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