Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSimilar(60)
We used model based comparisons to investigate group differences in the influence of the confounding factors.
In addition to model based comparisons, we calculated residuals for each participant using a modified cross-validation approach.
Prior to any analysis using model based comparisons, reaction times were transformed by taking the inverse to improve applicability of linear models [64].
The algorithms used in lme4 as well as the model based comparisons conducted here, are described by the main contributor to the lme4 package in more detail in [62].
A model based performance comparison of the conventional and proposed control structure is presented.
Contrasts were included in the model based on the comparison of interest.
The most appropriate demographic model based on Log10 BF comparison was the constant population size model (Log10 BF 1.92 and 2.22 compared to the BSP and exponential growth models, respectively).
The building and testing of comparison model based on the classification model framework can be accomplished using the following steps: 1) Sample positive and negative target genes data as a training model of the data set, from positive target genes (788 groups) and negative target genes (4000 groups) randomly, with total of 4788 target genes.
The slight outperformance in the negative binomial model relative to the CMP/geometric model (based on log-likelihood comparisons) stems from the negative binomial estimation procedure's allowance for real θ, thus obtaining a more precise estimation of the data over-dispersion.
Xue et al. (2016) employed a novel target-based norm in a multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) model based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy (IVIF) numbers to select the best material for hip implant.
Structure modelling based on comparison of hidden Markov models, suggested strong structural similarity with resolved structures of the Escherichia coli and Thermus thermophilus 5'nucleotidase (respective PDBs: 1hO5 and 2Z1a, Fig. 1C).
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