Sentence examples for proficiency difference from inspiring English sources

First, we present the bias for the three estimates' mean proficiency difference, β1 and β2.

Does either SMI or MMI of missing values on background variables lead to unbiased estimates of standard errors of subpopulation proficiency means, the mean subpopulation proficiency difference, and regression coefficients?  .

the mean proficiency estimates in both subpopulations (i.e., θ ¯ X 1 = 0 and θ ¯ X 1 = 1 ). the mean proficiency difference (i.e., θ ¯ X 1 = 1 − θ ¯ X 1 = 0 ). the estimated coefficient β2 in the latent regression model.

Does either SMI or MMI of missing values on background variables lead to unbiased estimates of subpopulation proficiency means, the mean subpopulation proficiency difference, and regression coefficients of proficiency on background variables?

Does either SMI or MMI of missing values on background variables lead to unbiased estimates of standard errors of subpopulation proficiency means, the mean subpopulation proficiency difference, and regression coefficients?

Language proficiency difference, however, could be suggested to be the most likely candidate to explain interference differences in the picture naming task.

In the 2PDM, there were no significant proficiency differences between decline and no-decline classes, neither for students at the academic nor for students at the non-academic school tracks.

However, in the present application, proficiency differences between groups were about one standard deviation for all models, which means that the differences in the results provided by the 2PLM and the mixture PD models are rather small when considered on a relative scale.

However, the system is immune from large variations in the survival rate that can reach as low as 70% in manual operation, due to technician fatigue and proficiency differences across technicians.

As with the phase 1 validation study (Owens et al. 2006), some laboratories consistently had lower CVs, further indicating proficiency differences in dissection.

The focus on pseudoword reading avoided confounds from proficiency differences in first and second language reading and allows us to test previously reported differences between English versus Italian subjects reading pseudowords (Paulesu et al. 2000).