Sentence examples for more correctly identified from inspiring English sources

Across 45 separate geographical regions covered simultaneously by ASTER and MODIS, we find that the SLSTR algorithm in fact detects 13% more correctly identified clusters of active fire pixels than the MOD14 algorithm, and that these contain 36% more active fire pixels.

In a fMRI study, Costafreda et al. [ 13] applied a classifier based on support vector machine (SVM) in the discrimination between BD versus schizophrenia (SZ) versus HC and found that SZ were more correctly identified (AD = 92%) than BD (AD = 79%).

When available, laboratory test results for serum sodium will more correctly identify patients with hyponatraemia.

Under the binomial distribution, assuming independent teams, the probability of five or more teams correctly identify two or more proteins is <img src="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/asset?id=info?doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0009202.e078.PNG" class= inline-graphic"/>.

At the same time, the manipulated photos with more change, and thus larger Delta-E values, may have been more difficult to match to a prior expectation resulting in these photos more often being correctly identified as manipulated.

More White men correctly identified ageing as an important cause of prostate cancer (P<0.001), whereas just under half of both Black men and White men correctly identified family history as an important cause.

Vast majority of isolates (165, i.e. 98.2%) were identified as M. tuberculosis complex using the molecular (GenoType Mycobacterium CM) tests, and three more isolates were correctly identified as M. kansasii.

In 1000 men, mpMRI followed by MRI-targeted biopsy 'clinically dominates' TRUS-guided biopsy as it results in fewer expected biopsies (600 vs 1000), more men being correctly identified as having clinically significant cancer (320 vs 250), and fewer men being falsely identified (20 vs 50).

The subjects raised several questions about the NRS and had more difficulty correctly identifying the number that denotes "no pain," suggesting that the NRS may be a more problematic scale for use in this population than the FPS-R.

In Newham, however, the four-site model was more powerful, correctly identifying 858 patients compared to 734 patients for the individual site approach.

A score of 4 or more would correctly identify all those with adequate health literacy skills, a score of 2 – 3 would indicate intermediate health literacy skills, and a score of 0 – 1 would indicate low health literacy skills.