Sentences with phrase «for linear»

If you're looking for a linear floor tile that boasts visual swagger, look to Lounge14 in the off - white Cosmopolitan or Spritzer color palettes, or the gray Sidecar color option.

Latent difference score structural models for linear dynamic analyses with incomplete longitudinal data

To explore main and moderating effects, we conducted a hierarchical regression analysis, to test for linear associations between exposure to bullying behaviors and symptoms of anxiety, as well as the interactive effects of exposure to bullying and the ability to defend, with regard to anxiety.

The results of this study provide evidence consistent with previous work for a linear relationship between adaptive behavior and intellectual development after controlling for neurological status in deaf children.

lmerTest: tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package).

The proportion of variance accounted for (R2 for linear models) or model discrimination (c statistic for logistic models) are reported for each of the four blocks.

Importantly, the effects found for marital satisfaction and marital break - ups persisted even after statistically controlling for linear and curvilinear differences (Methods) in the demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Test statistics for the linear mixed effects (LME) model were calculated using S - PLUS version 7.0 statistical software (Insightful Corp, Seattle, Washington).

Were you looking for linear - scales job results?

Click Here to search for linear - scales in our 2.4 M jobs.

As for the linear field of view, this essentially ditches the GoPro's signature fish - eye effect in favor of a more straightforward, albeit smaller framing.

Correlation is an appropriate numerical measure only for linear relationships, and is sensitive to outliers (values at the extremes).

Although Lighthouse does not provide document review services, we are able to partner with carefully vetted, leading review companies for linear review services.

Notably, applications have risen much more quickly at 108 per annum (2.9 % at the midpoint) over the period with R Squared of 90.6 % for a linear model.

By taking the quadrant of the circle's circumference for the linear unit, we fulfill the requirements of both quadrature and rectification of the circle's circumference.

For example: if we multiply the perimeter of a square by one - fourth of any line one - fifth greater than one side, we can, in like manner make the square's area to appear one fifth greater than the fact, as is done by taking the diameter for the linear unit instead of the quadrant of the circle's circumference.

Then approximately linear systems and restrictions necessary for the linear behavior are considered.

The acceleration within the CO2 rise and the rising SAT measured by GISTEMP are both remarkably good for a linear fit over the period 1975 - to - date.

For example if instead of each observation x (t) being represented as that, you can represent each observation as a vector, say — v (t) = (x (t), x (t) ^ 2, x (t) ^ 3), and then a MIMO model for linear evolution of v (t) ends up capturing some nonlinear parts of the evolution.

Another problem is that the residuals are not randomly distributed for the linear fit, with at the start and end part of the curve up to 6 ppm deviation from the fitted value, and in the middle -3.5 ppm.

The show, intended mostly for lighting and design professionals, has been a mecca for cutting - edge commercial lights such as replacements for linear fluorescents, strip lights (the kind that you'd put under kitchen cabinets), and recessed lights.

The error bar for linear least squares fit is ± 2 SDs.

The truth is that most of the waste we generate is not considered recyclable by the public system, and is instead destined for linear disposal by landfill or incineration.

Knowing whether someone did their rounding correctly, or used the right formula for a linear trend 3 years ago is purely of academic interest (i.e. of no interest at all).

For instance the correlation coefficient (R2) for the linear fit to GISS from 1979 until the present is currently running at R2 = 0.63 compared to 0.34 for UAH and 0.39 for RSS.

The range for linear contrails does not include other possible effects of aviation on cloudiness.

The 90 % confidence range for the linear twentieth century rise predicted by the semi-empirical model is 13 — 30 cm, whereas the observed interval (using two tide gauge data sets) is 14 — 26 cm.

The e-fold decay rate is what your formula shows for some extra CO2 above equilibrium to bring back the total CO2 back to equilibrium (for a linear process): e-fold decay rate = driving force / net sink rate 110 ppmv / 2.15 ppmv / year = 51.2 years

The second point is that if you are arguing for a linear increase, it suggests a problem trying to correlate against CO2 increase which is non linear.

I'm going slightly on the low end of that, for a linear trend of 0.15 to 0.2 C / decade.

This propagator is a measure for the linear stability.

The IPCC suggested «about 0.2» for the linear trend.

The most likely explanation for the linear trend [in sea ice decline] during the satellite era from 1979 onwards is the almost linear increase in CO2 concentration during that period.

For Passive House design, THERM is used for linear thermal bridge analysis.

Indeed, any sound wave propagating through a gas is doing the same trick — reversibly exchanging thermal energy for linear motion.

You see Mr. Bartemis, your temperature anomaly offers us no explanation for this linear trend: http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/plot/esrl-co2/trend

Arguing over the start date for your linear model, or the use of «variance corrected means» (whatever that means) over raw data or the acceptance or rejection of a null hypothesis is a joke.

In this case, enery is equipartitioned (almost, it's slightly more complicated) which means there is an equal amount of energy in three translational degrees of freedom (for all species), two rotational degrees of freedom for linear molecules only and three rotational degrees of freedom in non-linear molecules, and 3n -(5 or 6) degrees of vibrational freedom for (linear or non-linear) molecules IF those rotational or vibrational degress of freedom are «accessible».

Provide a citation for a linear trend being extrapolated «way outside the range» or withdraw it.

For a linear system, the decay of all the isotopes as a group (responding to a group impulse) is the sum of the decay curve for each individual isotope.

You have no physical explanation for your linear trend, no justification for asserting that there is one, no justification that any trend you claim will continue, and you are ignoring all of the responses you have had over many months that demonstrate that an upward curve provides a much better fit.

For water at the average temperature this is 0.0002 per degreeC (in volume), but 0.0006 per degreeC for linear.

But linear regression is known to give the best possible unbiased estimate of its parameters for any linear function of the data — if a regression can not give a reliable enough estimate of the global average temperature, it seems inevitable that the current method must be worse.

But the rules of thumb are only for linear regression models — which MBH obviously isn't.

It is a grand stretch to claim you can do the same for a linear or nearly linear change over that time frame.

For a linear model if you, say, increase all three CO2 isotope variants by 50 %, you could then measure what you call the «excess decay time» (what I meant by «residence time» as opposed to «exchange time») by watching the excess CO2 concentrations decay with time back to (or near to) the original amount.

They provide exact necessary and sufficient conditions for these characteristics for all linear systems and some nonlinear systems... Now I am merely trying to acquaint climate change scientists, physicists, lawyers and politicians promoting such things as Kyoto Protocols that chemical process control system engineering has a useful voice, weak as it is, in climate control engineering....

Over 1950 — 2005, the observed warming trend is slightly greater than the model expectation: a probability of 57 % for the linear trend compared with 61 % for the robust trend.

Over 1900 — 2005 the observed trend is substantially greater than the model expectation: a probability of 87 % for the linear trend compared with 78 % for the robust trend.

For each individual species, the model estimates random parameters for linear versions of the intercept and the four climate variables.