Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(5)
Given that these 'backward' flowing predictions are known to cancel the neural representation of expected visual information from the visual cortex [41], [42] and expected somatosensory information from the somatosensory cortex [43], the forward information flow in the visual to frontal and somatosensory to frontal direction should be much reduced.
In prokaryotes, ab initio genefinder predictions are known to be least reliable for very short genes[ 32].
Such predictions are known to be error-prone, and inclusion of cDNA data can improve the annotation considerably [ 36, 37].
Retaining the Gaussian model is not considered problematic here, however, as kriging predictions are known to be fairly robust to variogram model misspecification (Stein 1999).
All other data sets (distinct from the primary channel) that are used to make the predictions are known as reference channels, otherwise known as independent variables.
Similar(55)
Combining predictions is known to improve accuracy if certain conditions are met [11].
The accuracy of displacement predictions is known to depend on the correct parametrization of the mathematical model.
For example in the Oct4 analysis, 20 of the 28 predictions were functionally validated, even though 25 of the 28 predictions were known to express Oct4 RNA (i.e. + Oct4 as described earlier).
Estimating the absolute sensitivity and specificity of genome-wide TFBS predictions is known to be difficult because there are essentially no comprehensive collections of TFBSs with experimentally demonstrated functionality to use as a reference.
Furthermore, the majority of our predictions is known to play a role during development and is associated with one or more CGIs that are distributed along the miRNA primary transcript, indicating that these ST miRNAs may be subject to the same type of Polycomb-mediated repression seen in protein coding developmental genes.
Traditional scanning methods for TF binding site prediction are known to perform relatively poorly in that they typically have an excessively high false positive rate (see [29]).
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