Exact(1)
_____ November's Genius No 161 by Soup got slightly more correct entries than usual (302) by the deadline.
Similar(59)
ASD participants were slightly more likely to correct antisaccade errors [trend: t(22) = 1.77, P = 0.09; HC: 85 ± 13%; ASD: 93 ± 5%] (Fig. 2C), and did not differ from controls in the proportion of long versus short self-corrections [ t(22) = 1.50, P = 0.15, HC: 67 ± 29%; ASD: 51 ± 20%].
Collectively, these factors correctly predicted nearly all of those who did not undergo TKA within 2 years (91% correct prediction) but only slightly more than half (58% correct prediction) of those who did.
"Slightly more acidic than sweet," corrected W's features director, James Reginato, "but that's why we love him".
In contrast, (3) related lure false alarms were substantially more negative than correct rejections after about 600 ms, whereas target hits were only slightly more negative than related lure correct rejections after about 700 ms.
I think you'll find the correct terminology is slightly more complex and involving.
Therefore, the correct Ansatz is slightly more complicated, and we have to separate slowly and rapidly oscillating terms, δ u j = π j + ϑ j e i ϕ k j, (42).
It is noteworthy that WKY/NCrl was the group with the non-significant, but still highest percent correct lever choice, slightly more than 90%, at session 12.
For a mismatched (G·A) pair, extension of the control was inefficient, whereas for G[8,5-Me]T, it was only slightly more inefficient than that of the correct pair.
However it will be a major surprise, and relief, to all concerned if some slightly more encouraging weather forecasts prove to be correct.
Firstly, Sampson (2012), claims, "the experimental group were able to locate and correct their own errors slightly more successfully…than the control group… This small difference could be interpreted as suggesting coded feedback is slightly more successful at developing receptive awareness of correct forms than uncoded correction" (p. 499).
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