Because the results were very similar with both methods, we present only the SG-corrected analyses.
Those methods, however, present only the static situation of cells at the terminating time point, when samples were prepared.
Whereas the bias between PCCO and COTCP was not significantly different between NE dosage categories or categories of time elapsed between calibrations, interchangeability (percentage error <30%) between methods was present only in the high NE dosage subgroup (≥0.1 μg/kg/min), as the percentage errors were 40%, 47% and 28% in the no NE, NE < 0.1 and NE ≥ 0.1 μg/kg/min subgroups, respectively.
(c) In contrast to traditional ballistic trajectory approaches, both methods presented use only straight trajectories, i.e., flight paths of high-speed particles (indicated in blue).
In all the methods presented here, only the TD and ML methods can satisfactorily correct for importation cases.
To avoid Type I errors, we normalized the data using a housekeeper gene (see Methods), and we present only those correlations that are significant in both normalized and unnormalized sets of data.
Proteomic methods are presented only to disclose parameters for positive diagnosis.
Different variation of the methods, presented in[5], not only have lower transcoding frame rate, but also need higher computational complexity at the encoder side as they are using D0MD1 configurations.
We emphasize, then, that the data analysis methods presented here represent only a subset of techniques which will be required to manage the simulation data sets in future scales of computational cosmology.
The application of this method presented not only the control parameters in this PBPK model, but also correlations of parameters, which are important in determining the behaviors of the PBPK model.
