Sentence examples for susceptibility to error from inspiring English sources
The phrase "susceptibility to error" is a correct and usable phrase in written English
You can use it to describe a situation or system which is prone to making mistakes or errors. For example, "due to its susceptibility to error, the computer system has been malfunctioning more frequently than usual".
For Descartes, both are fallible; the relevant consideration distinguishing their susceptibility to error is that the two-speckled case is so much easier to render clear and distinct.
In contrast, if the human genome is characterized by inefficiency, susceptibility to error, and apparently useless components which can cause illness, the design hypothesis is at a clear disadvantage.
The perianesthesia environment of care is a unique high-risk health care setting that has a high susceptibility to error because of the vulnerability of patients who are undergoing surgery and anesthesia as well as the high levels of activity in these units.
But even if one accepts the susceptibility to error of people's intuitions, the objection can be reformulated: if the existence of mental conditions seems perfectly obvious and is central in people's conception of the world, then enormously strong arguments are needed in order to successfully deny the existence of mental conditions.
Susceptibility to errors in scanner calibration, 2.
Among the shortcomings are time dependence, susceptibility to errors in scanner and dose calibration, insufficient correlation between systemic distribution volume and body weight, and, consequentially, residual inter-study variability of the arterial input function (AIF) despite SUV normalization.
Susceptibility to errors in scanner calibration, Insufficient correlation between systemic distribution volume and body weight (leading to variants of the SUV approach using lean body mass (SUV l b m ) [4] or body surface area (SUV b s a ) [5] for normalization), and, consequentially, residual inter-study variability of the arterial input function (AIF) despite SUV normalization [6].
However, the SUV methodology has well-known shortcomings such as uptake time dependence of the SUV, unsatisfactory test/retest stability, susceptibility to errors in scanner calibration etc. [1 6] all of which adversely affect the reliability of the SUV as a surrogate of the metabolic rate of FDG (and ultimately of glucose consumption).
The present study emphasises the low susceptibility to errors of calcitonin screening.
However, it may result in increased susceptibility to errors, as the measured PWV is very sensitive to inaccuracies in any of the three measurements.
Second, despite being a population-based surveillance over several years, our cohort remained relatively small, resulting in limited statistical power and susceptibility to errors of chance.
