Used and loved by millions
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
noise comparison
Grammar usage guide and real-world examplesUSAGE SUMMARY
"noise comparison" is correct and usable in written English. You can use it in contexts where you are comparing different levels or types of noise, such as in acoustics or sound engineering. For example, "The study included a noise comparison between urban and rural environments." Alternative expressions include "sound comparison" and "acoustic comparison."
✓ Grammatically correct
Science
News & Media
Alternative expressions(20)
more boisterous than
more energetic than
noisier than
more vigorous than
more dynamic than
more potent than
more active than
more vibrant than
more enthusiastic than
more strenuous than
more strong than
more energy than
more effective than
more robust than
louder than
more clamorous than
sound intensity
more noisy
more cacophonous than
more thunderous than
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Human-verified examples from authoritative sources
Exact Expressions
2 human-written examples
In noise spectroscopy, one often uses a quantitative parameter for noise comparison is the Hooge parameter [17].
Science
Walker et al. [13] conducted a noise comparison study of two cases, the first of which was a concrete bridge carrying light rail vehicles.
Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources
Similar Expressions
58 human-written examples
Progress in airframe-noise simulations appears real, but systematic grid-refinement studies and noise comparisons with experiment or other simulations have yet to occur, and the theoretical uncertainty is high.
Analysis performed for electrode and tinnitus type and control subjects indicates an increase in gamma power for narrow band noise in comparison to control subjects (p<.05) in centro-occipital regions and an increase in gamma power for pure tones in comparison to control subjects (p<.05) in centro-frontal and centro-occipital regions (see Fig 2).
Science
This should result in a significant decrease of noise in comparison to that observed in non-quantum base HBTs.
Science
Eleven lesions in the patient were characterized in terms of: 1) temporal signal-to-noise ratio (tSNR); 2) physiological noise, through comparison of noise regressors derived from the white matter (WM), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and gray matter (GM); and 3) seed-based functional connectivity.
Academia
The mismatch negativity (MMN) ERP associated with preattentive sound change detection was elicited by the deviant and novel sounds and was not affected by the prerecorded background MRI noise (in comparison with the condition with no background noise).
Science
As kinetic modelling, using non-linear least squares optimisation, is computationally expensive and sensitive to noise, a comparison will be made between kinetic modelling and graphical analysis to quantify [18F]FCho uptake in tissues.
Science
We estimated the performance of the JOKARUS system in terms of amplitude spectral density (ASD) of frequency noise in comparison to the frequency stability of an iodine reference developed, characterized and reported previously [9, 25], called elegant breadboard model (EBB).
Science
As mentioned earlier, an array operating in super-directive mode has to face peculiar issues, such as a pronounced sensitivity to electro-mechanical imperfections and errors in the implementation of the beamforming weights, as well as increased vulnerability to internal noise, in comparison with a conventional uniformly weighted beamformer.
In this scheme, averaging is expected to reduce the uncorrelated noise in comparison with the repetitive AE signal component across the records of a given cluster, resulting in an amplitude SNR increase of at best, where is the number of events in a cluster.
Expert writing Tips
Best practice
When writing about "noise comparison", specify the parameters being compared (e.g., frequency, amplitude, source) for clarity.
Common error
Avoid assuming all readers understand the specific context of "noise" being discussed. Always provide sufficient background or definition to ensure clarity, especially in technical or scientific writing.
Source & Trust
80%
Authority and reliability
4.1/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested
Linguistic Context
The phrase "noise comparison" functions as a noun phrase, typically serving as a subject or object within a sentence. Ludwig AI provides examples where it denotes the act of comparing different types or levels of noise in various contexts. It's designed to quantify and analyze these differences.
Frequent in
Science
75%
News & Media
15%
Academia
10%
Less common in
Formal & Business
0%
Encyclopedias
0%
Wiki
0%
Ludwig's WRAP-UP
In summary, "noise comparison" is a grammatically sound noun phrase used to denote the act of comparing different types or levels of noise. Ludwig AI indicates that while not exceedingly frequent, the phrase finds its primary application within scientific and technical domains, with a noticeable presence in news media and academic publications. When employing this phrase, it's crucial to define the specific aspects of noise under comparison to ensure clarity and precision. The suggested alternatives, like "sound comparison" and "acoustic comparison", offer nuanced variations for related concepts.
More alternative expressions(10)
Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:
noise level comparison
Focuses specifically on comparing the level of noise, rather than a more general comparison.
comparing noise characteristics
Explicitly states the comparison of noise characteristics.
sound comparison
Replaces "noise" with "sound", broadening the scope of the comparison.
acoustic comparison
Uses "acoustic" to specify the type of comparison being made.
analyzing noise levels
Focuses on the analysis of noise levels, implying comparison as part of the analysis.
noise evaluation
Shifts from comparison to evaluation, implying a judgment of noise characteristics.
a contrast of noise
Uses "contrast" to highlight the differences between noises.
evaluation of sound
Changes "noise" to "sound" and suggests an evaluative process.
assessment of noise
Similar to evaluation, but focuses on assessing the noise.
noise differentiation
Focuses on distinguishing between different noises.
FAQs
How is "noise comparison" used in scientific studies?
In scientific studies, "noise comparison" is used to analyze and differentiate between various sources or levels of noise, often to improve signal processing or reduce unwanted interference. It often involves statistical analysis and signal processing techniques.
What are some contexts where I might need to make a "noise comparison"?
You might need to make a "noise comparison" in acoustics, environmental studies, signal processing, or when evaluating the performance of different audio equipment. You can use alternatives like "sound comparison" or "acoustic comparison".
What makes a good "noise comparison"?
A good "noise comparison" is based on clear metrics, consistent measurement techniques, and a well-defined scope. It should accurately represent the differences between the compared noise sources or levels.
Is "noise comparison" different from "signal-to-noise ratio comparison"?
Yes. "Noise comparison" is a general term for comparing noises, while "signal-to-noise ratio comparison" specifically evaluates the strength of a desired signal relative to background noise. Signal-to-noise ratio considerations are crucial in engineering and scientific applications.
Editing plus AI, all in one place.
Stop switching between tools. Your AI writing partner for everything—polishing proposals, crafting emails, finding the right tone.
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Source & Trust
80%
Authority and reliability
4.1/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested