Exact(7)
The repeatability of the methods was evaluated in the same way as in [9], [15] based on the repeatability error (i.e. e, Table 2).
Precision of the methods was evaluated by 15 double wear measurements.
The performance quality of the methods was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.
The predictive ability of the methods was evaluated using a 10-fold, cross-validation approach, and differed only marginally for most method/trait combinations.
The performance of the methods was evaluated in the determination of structural categories of each query structure from the above 108 proteins.
The efficiency of the methods was evaluated using the precision and recall parameters as two commonly used measures of information retrieval assessments.
Similar(53)
The methods are evaluated using medical images of MRI and CT of the human brain and thoracic studies.
The methods were evaluated through a combination of SEM analysis and batch dissolution experiments.
All of the methods are evaluated using an identical data set in similar conditions.
In Subsections 3.1 and 3.2, the methods are evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively.
The performance of the methods is evaluated using the signal model.
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