Exact(1)
The increased sensitivity tends to lead the system to yield more false positives, which will cause the Precision to decrease.
Similar(59)
When increasing k the outliers tend to be suppressed hence the precision tend to decrease.
Speciation values are well estimated to the known values (λ0 = 0.1, λ1 = 0.1) when the difference between extinction rates is 2× (low tip bias), but accuracy and precision seems to decrease dramatically as the extinction rate asymmetry increases (high tip bias), leading to an abundance of highly asymmetrical estimates of speciation rates.
However, for a similarity threshold which exceeds 0.8, the precision value starts to decrease.
In fact, once we use an h-index threshold of 6, precision values start to decrease, suggesting that the SSM scores start to degrade because of the high amount of concepts removed from the ancestry.
Depth magnitude tended to increase with disparity, while realism, precision, and fusion tended to decrease.
In general, when recall increases precision may be expected to decrease.
This ill-defined situation is likely to decrease precision of the comet assay especially when assessing the rapid phase of DNA repair.
As expected, the precision values were seen to decrease with an increase in the threshold value as GO terms predicted lower down in the ranked lists were irrelevant as opposed to recall that increased with threshold indicating the increase in the total number of relevant terms retrieved.
It is also possible that more frequent calibrations should be performed: in our cohort, precision of PediaSat started to decrease, in a clinically significant way, after the 8 th hour after calibration and this trend was similar after each calibration (as seen in the subgroup of patients who passed the 24 th monitoring hour and whose PediaSat catheter was therefore re-calibrated).
If instead we continue to decrease the precision, there will be a point where biases start to appear.
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