Sentence examples for these terminologies from inspiring English sources

The use of these terminologies is firmly entrenched in many systems, and what might seem to be a simple option of replacing these terminologies is not possible.

We may apply these terminologies to other differential equations and partial differential equations.

Moreover, these terminologies evolve over time in order to suit the needs of users.

In practice, these terminologies (e.g. SNOMED CT, LOINC, FMA, and so on) were defined by multiple organisations (IHTSDO, Regenstrief Institute with Indiana University, Washington University in Seattle, respectively), with significant overlaps in terms of scope.

This usage has created a certain amount of ambiguity in academia, researchers, and industry regarding the meaning of these terminologies since they are either too broad or too narrow.

Therefore, the unification of these terminologies as CMT instead of hypodontia etc., and using standardized templates to clearly define CMT and mild, moderate, and severe cases of CMT or hypodontia are necessary.

All of these terminology systems are also clinical terminology systems and when resources are generated from a union of the partitions is it therefore reasonable that they have similar results in batch 4. In this section the questions in the section Automatic word alignment are answered.

These terminology systems have been built and translated during large systematic projects and their main parts can therefore be assumed to have repetitive structure in the rubrics and similar structure in the original and translated rubrics, which make them easier to automatically align, especially after manual training.

Consequently, using terms from these two terminologies that have been linked, these new subsumptive inferences can only be made between subject terms for which necessary and sufficient definitions can be created (e.g. substance-transport terms) and not with the object terms (e.g. the substances that are being transported) used in these definitions.

Initially, we expected that the structural information of these two terminologies could have provided some useful clues for the matching, however these two terminologies are organised differently.

Though these other terminologies will sometimes be preferred by different supporters, CSR will continue to be the centerpiece of these competing and complimentary frameworks (Carroll 2015a).