Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(9)
Better empirical values for the factor are suggested.
The results were evaluated by a two-factor variance analysis with repetition of the values for the factor measuring time.
All factors reached the recommended critical values for the factor reliabilities, but only four factors reached adequate AVE values.
However, these associations may be absent in our study because of the high percentage of missing values for the factor medical history.
Thus, as Table 2 shows, the t values for the factor loading of all measurement items reached the level of significance (p<.05), no single factor included only one question, and the composite reliability values for all constructs were greater than 0.6, which demonstrated satisfactory convergent validity [ 31, 33].
Thus, as Table 5 shows, the t values for the factor loading of all measurement items reached the significance level (p < 0.01), no single factor included only one question, and the composite reliability values for all constructs exceeded 0.6, which demonstrated satisfactory convergent validity [ 85– 85].
Similar(51)
The model was used to find optimized values for the factors such as pH, Cu II) concentration and accumulation potential.
Subsequently, the selected factors were subjected to response surface methodology (RS M with a four factor-five coded level central composite design (CCD), using Quadratic model for obtaining the optimum values for the factors.
The exit velocity distribution of the workpiece obtained from the analysis results was used to find appropriate values for the factors used in the proposed bearing length design equation.
The optimum values for the factors were found to be 0.06 mL of seed, 7.2 × 10−3 M of ascorbic acid and 0.05 M of the CTAB in the final solution.
In the first experiment, three main sources of variation were identified: (1) different levels of dissection, (2) omitted components, and (3) different values for the factors used to compute PCI.
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