Maximum of reflection loss, absorbing bandwidth and thickness of this work compared with those of previously reported graphene- and CNT-based wave-absorbing composites: (a) absorbing bandwidth at −10 dB, (b) maximum of reflection loss.
One significant difference between scenario 2 and [8] was that the Kendall's coefficient of concordance reported was W=0.24 for this work compared with W=0.89 in [8].
However, in this work, compared with the above results, our method has a very high robustness, which can be seen in the following subsection (the system models suffer from time-varying parameters as well as system uncertainties).
One explanation for the difference in contents could therefore be a restricted opportunity for reaction of PFB with hydrazones or azines in this work compared to that in the study of Liu et al. [9].
Ten Caenorhabditis species were available in culture prior to this work, compared with over 2000 described Drosophila species [ 10].
The introduction of E+[ k, b, q] and the corresponding DP procedure are the methodologically novel points of this work, compared with our previous work [ 20].
So, in this work, comparing with Fig. 1a, a higher current density in Fig. 1b would result in a higher beam energy deposition rate and thus cause more pronounced structural instabilities for the atoms to migrate or escape more easily.
In this context, one needs to know how the size of the GRN in this work compares with that in other studies.
Unlike [15] in which we did not compare our method with other approaches, this work compares our proposed framework against other semi-supervised and supervised learners.
Considering a symmetric Gaussian multi-way relay channel (MWRC) with K users, this work compares two transmission strategies, namely one-way relaying (OWR) and multi-way relaying (MWR), in terms of their achievable rates.
This work compares the asynchronous microprocessor with a synchronous version.
