Further, the discrimination between correct versus incorrect nucleotide insertion also decreased significantly, suggesting that pol β could be modestly error-prone if positioned to insert a nucleotide opposite a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon lesion.
As previously mentioned, the experimental design did not attempt to control for incorrect responses, which may have underestimated the modestly higher error rates for the square grotesque typeface.
After the peak response, however, the steering behavior becomes slower and the error increases modestly.
While sampling for combination of two variables (adult Pseudocalanus and phytoplankton), the errors are modestly reduced by an annual average of 7% (range from −4%to14%4%), suggesting that the ongoing operational observing strategy is close to optimal for multi-constituent sampling.
PFOA water concentrations in the contaminated region differed by several orders of magnitude across PWDs and across years (Shin et al. 2011a), which may explain why perturbing the exposure estimates with as much as 10-fold uncertainty contributed only modestly to the total standard error and negligibly to bias.
Moreover, these changes in estimated serum PFOA had a negligible impact on the mean AOR for preeclampsia and only modestly increased its total standard error, likely because the regression is more sensitive to the rank order of participant exposures than it is to absolute exposure assignments.
There was evidence for this hypothesis in our analysis where we found that better cognitive performance in both cognitively normal and cognitively impaired subjects modestly correlated with the AMNART errors after adjusting for the biomarker levels.
The time since the last calibration correlated positively, although modestly, with the absolute average measuring error (Pearson's r = 0.118; P = 0.024).
So CRLB can precisely predict the decoding error when the SNR is modestly large and is useful a tool to understand the system's performance.
Using the same parameters as in Figure 2D, we found that the error increased with s, although modestly.
This 4.5% difference in error rates between the typefaces observed in this study appears modestly larger than the 3.8% difference observed in Study I. Participants' gender was not a predictor of error rates (F 1, 38) = 0.72, p = 0.402).
