Your English writing platform
Free sign upSuggestions(5)
Exact(60)
Existing phalangeal joint locating methods are sensitive to light illumination and cannot locate phalangeal joint stably.
Unfortunately, such transformation methods are sensitive to the accuracy of the statistics estimation.
Traditional intensity-based methods are sensitive to intensity distortions, contrast agent and noise.
Electrical methods are sensitive to both the presence and nature of formation fluids.
However, the current ridge extraction methods are sensitive to noise and may easily get trapped in a local optimum.
In particular, inverse methods are sensitive to measurement errors, for example, those caused by a mispositioned temperature sensor on a solid body.
GC MS methods are sensitive and robust but present the disadvantages of time-consuming sample pretreatment, that is often based on hydrolysis and derivatisation reactions.
Most of the existing methods are sensitive to text color, size, font, and background clutter, because they use simple segmentation methods or require prior knowledge about text shape.
Both tested methods are sensitive to calcite precipitation, with SIP offering additional information related to long term stability of precipitated carbonate.
The developed methods are sensitive and reliable, and can be used by diagnostic laboratories for routine testing and disease management decisions.
While both methods are sensitive to the accuracy and resolution of temperature and bondline thickness measurements, the transient technique is additionally sensitive to the relative contribution of the TIM in the full junction-to-ambient thermal path.
More suggestions(15)
procedures are sensitive
methods are significant
mode are sensitive
methods present sensitive
methods are available
methods are notorious
methods are primitive
methods are shoddy
methods are unconventional
methods are soil-free
methods are superior
methods are simple
methods are insane
methods are different
methods are valid
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