"most conservative scenario" is a correct and usable phrase in written English.
This phrase can be used when discussing potential outcomes or estimates and expressing a preference for the most conservative option. For example, "Given the uncertainty of the situation, it would be wise to focus on the most conservative scenario available."
The most conservative scenario calls for an average annual fuel efficiency increase of 3 percent, which works out to 47 m.p.g. by 2025.
Therefore, in the most conservative scenario the HQI increases the risk of drug arrests by about 400%%.
Results showed that the effluent streams presented perennial water production of 4,000 l ha−1 day−1 in the most conservative scenario.
The ensemble-electrode ELDR required lower applied voltage than the single-electrode ELDR, and in the most conservative scenario, it consumed only 9 times more electric power to protect an area 36 times larger.
Assuming the most conservative scenario with 0.1% conversion of N2 to NH4+, the annual NH4+ production would be between 5.9 × 108 mol (4 × PDTH) and 1.2 × 109 mol (8 × PDTH) if 5% of Earth's heat is removed via SHS and between 9.4 × 109 mol (4 × PDTH) and 1.9 × 1010 mol (8 × PDTH) if 80% of heat is removed via SHS.
Under the most conservative scenario of excluding exenatide failures, the dominance of insulin glargine persisted with a mean ICER of -£4,579 per QALY gained.
It's estimated by C. Fred Bergsten that such an appreciation could create 1 million jobs within a year under the most conservative scenarios.
Accordingly, the robust model is implemented and it considers one scenario, namely the most-conservative scenario of the objective function in the main problem.
In addition, the capacity of the injected power of EVs is reduced in the most-conservative scenario in comparison with the deterministic model's scenario, while the consumed power of loads and EVs have been increased in this scenario.
The sensitivity analysis showed that the surgical option remains dominant (cost-saving and QALY increasing) in all scenarios, even under the assessed most conservative case scenario (table 6).
Populations suffering from negative effects of poisoning on survival rates but not managed with AFS (scenario 4 Table 2) showed a lower population growth rate and a slightly higher probability of extinction in the time horizon of 50y than its most conservative counterpart (scenario 1: λ = 0.961±0.002, pe(t = 50) = 0; scenario 4: λ = 0.932±0.002, pe(t = 50) = 0.05; Fig. 5).
