Sentences with phrase «empirical tests done»

And in empirical tests done by Microsoft, it did converge faster than a more Elo - like system that didn't use the probability stuff.

Not exact matches

No, I have done many empirical tests of the possibility that I am «under god» and all of them failed totally.

This sort of empirical testing is very tricky indeed, which undoubtedly explains why so little work has been done in just this area.

«Theology of prayer» does not change anything — ’ t is a matter of how you set up the experiment to test an empirical question.

Not only does this provide us with more empirical data, but focusing on a «hard» case tends to be more fruitful when formulating and testing theories.

Anyone who has the impulse to check whether the paint is wet has exactly the right kind of instincts for doing science: a ready curiosity, a desire to gather empirical evidence, a willingness to get dirty in order to put a theory to the test.

Don't be afraid to test the software opportunities and marketing strategies, analyze the results of your attempts and make your own conclusions, based on empirical experience.

What we don't have, though, is a strong, empirical, persuasive case to ditch test - based accountability, either writ large or within school choice programs.

Existing empirical evidence, however, does not find a strong role for measured characteristics of teachers — such as teacher experience, education, and test scores of teachers — in the determination of academic achievement of students.

The empirical evidence simply does not support the use of one - size - fits - all curriculum standards and high stakes testing as effective...

The empirical evidence simply does not support the use of one - size - fits - all curriculum standards and high stakes testing as effective tools to improve the education and life outcomes of over 56 million public school students in the third most populous country on the planet.

Empirical studies of the relationship between school inputs and test scores typically do not account for household responses to changes in school inputs.

☻ An electrical model (although it isn't a model but an empirical test - rig) has been built to show how feedback does not require «forcing» but happens with the un-forced parameters alone.

Strawman, quote my words not what you imagine, I do not assume that — I repeat: From the way you have mangled my post in your replies I'm coming to the reluctant conclusion that you're either incapable of thinking to the standard required in science which is the ability to separate fact from fiction in the discipline of empirical observation and testing, or, you're deliberately distracting from the points I'm making in my argument.

Fifth, even if real scientific investigation (which doesn't stop with modeling but tests models by empirical observation) could tell us that, say, falling 50 % short of net zero «carbon» emissions would raise GAT by, say, 3 ° C and that that, in turn, would cause significant harms, that wouldn't tell us how we ought to respond.

So while I expect that climate scientists will argue against «empirical AR1» coefficients as too severe a pseudoproxy test, I, for one, do not think that «empirical AR1» coefficients are too severe a test — if anything, they are probably not severe enough.

An examination of the empirical literature did not support this belief: Econometric forecasts were not shown to be significantly better in any of the 14 ex post and 16 ex ante tests.

So I really do not see why those like Pekka Pirilä or Vaughan Pratt are so opposed to simply TESTING the hypothesis, to see if it is falsified or corroborated by empirical evidence.

I'd say the thing to do now is to test your hypothesis — first with climate models, as Judith has suggested, and (more importantly) with empirical data that either falsify or validate it.

In science, when a hypothesis is advanced and tested using empirical evidence, and the results of the testing do not support the hypothesis, the hypothesis is then discarded.

Later Angstrom did some empirical lab tests which seemed to indicate Arrhenius was wrong.

In they days before» post normal science» when hypothesese were falsified or not with real empirical data it was expected that if one wanted to determine a change in some factor — for example response in corn yields to different rates of types of fertilsier the test was done on the same soil type in the same years.

And if one of your Briffa or Mann collaborations shows where they've done empirical field tests, please point me at it.

To date, however, the related literature in Canada is slim and, to the extent it exists, does not deploy the empirical methods necessary to test independently for the influence of interveners on the decisions of individual judges.