Your English writing platform
Free sign upSuggestions(2)
Exact(2)
The objective of the paper is to determine which of the integration methods compared is more efficient in computing the interaction surfaces for rectangular and circular sections.
As the input to all other methods compared is based on exon level, we adopted MADS to work on this level as well for comparability reasons.
Similar(58)
Certain properties of the two methods compared are complementary.
The methods compared, are summarized in Table 3.
The results of the methods compared were collected from the original papers where these methods were published.
The statistical power of the different methods compared was also influenced by the level of correlation between HRQoL measures (ρ parameter).
A total of 53 comparative studies were assessed and the performance of 72 methods/sub-methods compared is analysed.
Our developed method, COMPARE, is an inference procedure that uses structured logistic regression for sparse-matrix completion.
The second method we compared was supervised principal components (SPC) [ 18].
Statistical significant results are indicated by *, method compared with is indicated by number (P < 0.05).
Statistical significant results are indicated by *, the method compared with is indicated by number (P < 0.05).
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