Sentence examples for mean unsigned errors from inspiring English sources

Relative binding free energies can be calculated with good accuracy, typically with R-squared values in the range of 0.5 0.8 and mean unsigned errors (MUE) of about 1 kcal/mol when comparing to experimental data.

The parametrized mDC model, however, is found to produce interaction energy mean unsigned errors smaller than any of the MM, QM, or semiempirical QM/MM methods.

When combining all the subjects, the binaural performances were relatively precise (see Figure 2) with mean unsigned errors of 7.7±0.3°.

The mDC Δ E mean unsigned error is considerably better than the MM TIP3P model, the DFTB3 semiempirical model, the MNDO/TIP3P QM/MM method, and the two ab initio Hamiltonians.

This yields a mean unsigned error of 0.68 kcal/mol for the absolute binding free energies.

The results of the studies show that the mean unsigned error is 0.44 log units for Ki data and 0.55 log units for IC50 data.

In terms of accuracy of localization, we observed a strong increase in the mean unsigned error of the subjects compared to binaural conditions (all subjects combined, mean error 30.4±1.4°, p<0.05, Figure 2 right).

In the group which received a visual indication of their performance accuracy (group FB), subjects also present an overall improvement in their sound localization performances expressed as a 10.8° (±0.1°) reduction in their mean unsigned error of sound localization.

We found that the mean unsigned error with the hemispheric decoder was greater than 30°, when trained and tested in quiet with HRTFs.

In Moore et al. (2008), the mean unsigned error was directly reported (although only for directions near the midline) and was in the 2 4° range.

In Figure 6D, we report a mean unsigned error of 5° for the optimized hemispheric model (including frequency-dependent and nonlinear corrections; error for the pattern decoder was nearly 0°).