Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(8)
For two of these heuristics, we evaluate the improvement given by using work-stealing in terms of task average response times.
A secondary analysis was run to compare music and language groups on baseline conditions of the flanker task (average of null and neutral) and mixed conditions (average of congruent and incongruent).
The machine room lift reduced peak sagittal angle by up to 90% (average: 76%; range: 64 90%), peak sagittal accelerations by up to 86% (average: 72%; range: 59 86%) and had a positive impact on the time to complete the task (average reduction: 19%).
In contrast, the slope of the linear fit to the response curves in trials with the secondary task was −0.63 (95% bootstrap CI = [−0.75, −0.53]), which was significantly more negative than the slope in trials without the secondary task (average difference = −0.45; 95% bootstrap CI = [−0.61 −0.28]).
For the math task, average ratings were 0.44, 0.77, and 0.58 for euglycemia, hypoglycemia, and hyperglycemia, respectively, with a significant main effect across blood glucose levels (F = 4.3, P < 0.0001).
This efficiency was operationalised by time on task, average fixation duration (duration of the time an eye stays in one position), and average saccade length (distance between two fixations).
Similar(52)
Performance on this task averaged 81%.
Finally, the color task averaged substantially lower performance on T1 (43.9%) than the identity task (75.8%).
When the eye position entered the target window, the fixation point was extinguished and the target persisted on the screen for 400 ms. The monkeys' performance on this task averaged 92% correct.
Table 3 shows results for supervised classification task averaged over 10 random test splits of Development Data.
The behavioral performance on the task, averaged across all trials and subjects is shown in Table 1 and confirms that subjects were deploying their attention correctly.
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