Sentences with phrase «demonstrated in a small scale»

«Substantial technological advances are needed, although all the different building blocks have in principle been demonstrated in a small scale.»

Not exact matches

Ramanathan and colleagues plan to demonstrate this on a small scale over the next few years in the Himalayas, over a 12 - square - mile area in the foothills.

The first part of the process, the phytoplankton bloom, has already been demonstrated in small - scale tests in the South Pacific and the equatorial Pacific Ocean.

Hilary Wilson, EUMETSAT's Sentinel - 3 Project Manager added, «It is very exciting to see all the small scale thermal features clearly captured in the Benguela region and this really demonstrates the potential of the Sea and Land Surface Temperature Radiometer.

From his own personal standpoint, Moloney is committed to demonstrating that the high - quality graduates Canada produces can help make the biotech industry in Canada as competitive as the more traditional centers, such as the Bay Area and Massachusetts, even if on a smaller scale.

These results were combined with those of Dr. Tchantchou, who demonstrated that mitigation of g - force by the elastic frame designs virtually eliminates the behavioral alterations in lab rats and loss of neuronal connections observed using small scale vehicles with fixed frames, as published in the Journal of Neurotrauma.

The most highly cited Geophysical Laboratory papers of the past forty years demonstrate the breadth and evolution of science in the department, ranging from seminal discoveries to breakthroughs in technique, spanning small research teams to large - scale collaborations.

The researchers, who published their discovery August 26th in Physical Review Letters, have demonstrated the effectiveness of their technique on a small scale and now plan to use the device in a large - scale detector, which they envision as a chamber containing a ton of high - pressure, purified xenon gas.

The resulting paintings, which are often small in scale, demonstrate the artist's deeply felt exploration of her surroundings and also her sense of their underlying energies.

The works on view will range from smaller - scale, metal and cord works from the late 1960s to constructions from the 1980s and 1990s that encompass entire rooms, thus demonstrating the artist's signature vocabulary of forms in varied combinations and at different scales.

Jack Whitten Ribbons of Honor 2009 acrylic collages on painted panel In the exhibition, small - scale paintings Ribbons of Honor, demonstrate Whitten's ability to shock and awe with color, surface tension and geometry.

Kate demonstrates in gouache and oil the more intimate and spontaneous front end of her process through these smaller scale works painted plein air and which were literally brought home in her suitcase.

On view will be several smaller - scale, early works in metal and cord from the 1960s; significant permutational works from the 1970s that change over time; reliefs and site - situational constructions from later in the artist's career; and a selection of drawings and artist's books, thus demonstrating the scope of formal and conceptual invention that the artist achieved within his defined idiom.

A 2014 paper published in Conservation Biology demonstrates how elusive win - win scenarios can be, even on smaller scales.

The same principles demonstrated in this small garden - to - be, Read noted, can be scaled for use by large farms — the paths through the area would be wider and the rows of food straighter, but the idea would be the same.

It has been demonstrated in small - scale experimental fires that the amount of radiant heat energy liberated per unit time (the fire radiative power; FRP) is related to the rate at which fuel is being consumed.

It would be astounding if a technology that exists only in PowerPoint presentations — magical small, cost - effective, fail - safe nuclear reactors — could possibly be researched, developed, demonstrated, and then scaled up faster than a host of carbon - free technologies that are already commercial today.

Sure, it's been adding financial institutions to its RippleNet, and it's demonstrated in small - scale tests and demos that its blockchain can transmit data quickly and efficiently.

Anyone who doubted the seriousness of those comments in the media may be swayed if a partner business as close as Braintree began accepting bitcoin, demonstrating its utility on a slightly smaller scale than the two online giants.

• Substantial knowledge of database software including MS Access, Oracle and SQL Server • Skilled in creating maps and spatial datasets using various GIS software • Adept at conducting geographical research involving collection, analysis and integration of spatial data • Demonstrated ability of combining drawings from various sources into consolidated sets in terms of scales, line weights and attributes • Effective skills in placement and maintenance of graphical figures in GIS systems using Intergraph FRAMME and Small World • Expert in Micro Station, AutoCAD, Civil 3D and other integrated electronic drawing packages

Many of the scales demonstrated weak psychometrics in at least one of the following ways: (a) lack of psychometric data [i.e., reliability and / or validity; e.g., HFQ, MASC, PBS, Social Adjustment Scale - Self - Report (SAS - SR) and all perceived self - esteem and self - concept scales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales demonstrated weak psychometrics in at least one of the following ways: (a) lack of psychometric data [i.e., reliability and / or validity; e.g., HFQ, MASC, PBS, Social Adjustment Scale - Self - Report (SAS - SR) and all perceived self - esteem and self - concept scales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiScales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsivity).

Although small in scale, the study demonstrated that chemical changes did indeed occur in the brains of the fathers.

An inspection of the mean plots (see Fig. 2) indicated that the differences in scores over time for the low CU group was smaller than the differences in scores over time for the high CU group, suggesting that the high CU group demonstrated more change (i.e., improvement) on these scales with treatment.