Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(4)
Table 2 Correct detection rate of different methods of Borkar's dataset Category Borkar Jung Proposed Isolated highway 98.24 98.31 93.92 Metro highway 98.12 98.33 95.04 Urban 87.12 90.52 93.31.
In experiment 1, we demonstrate the false-positive rate of different methods under varying correlation of genes in the gene set.
In experiment 3, we quantify the false-positive rate of different methods under the competitive hypothesis, where many gene sets are similarly differentially expressed, but one of the gene sets contains correlated genes.
Although in Figure 2 we only compare recall rate of different methods as we vary the number of causal genes selected by each method, these figures are similar to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves which are used as a measure to compare results for different methods in statistics and machine learning.
Similar(56)
Miss-classification rates of different methods are computed and the results are shown in Table 1.
The average achievable rates of different methods are compared in Figure7.
Table 5 lists the average recognition rates of different methods for face recognition under salt and pepper noise.
Table 7 The average recognition rates of different methods on the CMU-PIE database for face recognition under varying illumination Algorithm FLBP NRLBP++ LG-face W-face G-face BN2 BNR-NetworkoRecognitionion rate 0.5489 0.5744 0.8863 0.8898 0.9093 0.9122 0.9234 0.9378 The bold indicates the best.
It is more difficult to compare the conversion rates of different methods (the proportion of loci that lead to high-quality assay) but reported marker conversion rates for SNP genotyping approaches often range from 50% to 86% [ 9].
In this study, the credibility as opposed to the validity of standard setting methods was studied, with credibility established by comparing the pass/fail rates of different methods with a reference group that is expected to have a high pass rate [ 20].
The average sensitivity, false positive rate and statistical significance of different methods for the combined enzyme dataset are presented in Table 4, and the complete statistics is given in Additional File 6. SDPclust shows a relatively high sensitivity and a relatively low false discovery rate for both datasets.
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