Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(10)
The calibration for the IoChD scoring does not provide substantial benefits because the score is based on a likelihood ratio over a MAP adaptation using the same UBM and the marginal improvement comes from the combination of scores.
Quantitative SUVr scoring does not change with MC, showing that scoring using cortical standard regions is robust against (minor/medium) motion, likely due to the use of large regions and low image contrast around them.
The three classes include various types of scoring algorithms are used for molecular docking, historically, scoring does not correlate well with binding activity, although Consensus scoring, which takes a weighted average of several methods, can result in improvements [23, 24].
The slight error introduced in individual peptide scoring does not influence the accuracy of the score histogram much since these errors largely cancel each other when lumping the scores into a histogram.
However, lookahead scoring does not improve the theoretical worst case time complexity of the naive algorithm.
The original I ntaRNA scoring does not weight the unfolding energy of the interaction sites, i.e. α=1.
Similar(50)
But scoring did not come naturally for Kurland.
Quantitative SUVr scoring did not change markedly with motion correction.
Observer damage scoring did not correlate with penetrative or volumetric PE wear.
Bach's score does not specify instrumentation.
Moreover, the Hamaguchi ultrasonographic score does not specifically predict NASH.
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