Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
It is observed from the study that all the three models performed comparatively well in prediction.
Similar(59)
The AE, SW, SE, and LI model also performed comparatively better.
Furthermore, the NB based model with MACCS fingerprints in combination with molecular property-based descriptors and ToxPrint fingerprints performed comparatively good for AhR with an AUC value of 0.84 and 0.82 respectively.
Clothing performed comparatively well in the non-food category, as did smaller home improvement goods.
T-SPOT.TB test was performed comparatively in the same category groups.
Acid 4 k, the methylthio-analogue of 4 d, also performed comparatively poorly (entry 11).
The pulp sensitivity testing was performed comparatively with the neighboring or homologous teeth.
Of the four definitions, the simplest (at least 1 outpatient claim) performed comparatively to other definitions.
In contrast to the MOs, the LHWs performed comparatively better in knowledge assessment despite having limited formal medical education [ 30].
Similarly, Rfam-based covariance models performed poor to classify the novel/non-similar sequences whereas comparatively structural information based graph-properties of RNAcon method performed well because graph-properties based features provide both local as well as global structural features of a particular class.
The models performed their roles, too.
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