Sentences with phrase «grid sizes»

From changing your icons and your grid sizes to fine - tuning animations and transitions, Nova is both easy for beginners to grasp yet detailed enough for seasoned themers to get things set just so.

Gone is the customary app drawer, replaced by a home screen with adjustable grid sizes and animated transitions.

If you choose to use the OxygenOS default launcher, you get a nice set of customizations there, from changing icon sizes and app drawer grid sizes, to enabling quick gestures and changing the look of the search bar on your home screen.

It also has a few additional customization features like icon pack support, variable icon and grid sizes, adaptive icons, and more.

While 5x5 will allow your icons to better line up with your dock, don't be afraid to try out even bigger grid sizes — I use a 8x6 grid on my HTC 10 and it's worked out quite well for me.

With Android 4.4.4 CM 11 M8 Snapshot released you will get the following major changes: «heads up» notification, VPN fixes, custom homescreen grid sizes, Interface replaced by Status Bar, Notification Drawer and Gestures, now the «expanded desktop» option is listed under «display», all lock screen related elements are now under «lock screen» while all duplicates have been removed from «Security» menu, Navigation Bar controls are now found under Buttons, added Protected Apps component, Search Panel Google Now option added to Trebuchet launcher, Whisper push fixed, and others more.

Minimalist designs can also be achieved with smaller grid sizes.

Not only is Nova faster, but it's got tons of customization tweaks like gestures, adjustable grid sizes, and icon packs, just to name a few.

With extra tall screens becoming the new normal, having a wide array of grid sizes is important, as you're going to want a few more rows to take advantage of that real estate.

From my experience there are far too many independent variables that need to be somehow made dependent and the grid sizes are far too huge.

Atmospheric flow is well resolved, and GCM climates are not highly sensitive to resolution at the scales being run for AR4 or AR5 where smaller grid sizes have generally been used.

It is very easy to do tests on the discretization impacts by changing grid sizes or time - steps and making sure the solution doesn't change the climate.

I've never suggested the GISS graph I plotted is for a different area than the BEST graph I plotted, save in that their grid sizes are different.

In hydrodynamics we look at grid sizes — sometimes sub-grids within grids — that gives useful information on the required scale.

So... the models don't give better answers to questions like climate sensitivity despite getting larger, faster, and using smaller grid sizes... and your conclusion is that because they have not improved, we should trust them?

If they were, they would have given better answers as they got larger, faster, and used smaller grid sizes... but they continue to give the same answers.

This must be done for all countries, all sizes of economies and for all grid sizes.

With four grid sizes - each one presenting you with ten levels - can you turn all the lights out?With forty different levels, as well as the...

This version includes several grid sizes, including four by four all the way up to eight by eight.

Adjust the difficulty level in a one - player game by trying different grid sizes and multiple colors.

This version is equipped with eight different categories, two difficulty levels (normal and reverse), several grid sizes, automatically generated puzzles and more than 3,000 words.

The series ran in conjunction with IMSA events starting with its second season in 2014 and enjoyed tremendous growth, with grid sizes increasing 50 percent through the season.

A multitude of guiding lines, different grid sizes, and angles ensure your cuts are absolutely precise.

It's good to see the FIA keen to increase the grid size though.

This computation is difficult because as the grid size increases, the amount of memory needed to store everything balloons rapidly.

We calculated that if the simulators used a grid size of about 10 - 27 metres, then the cut off energy would vary in different directions.

The team calculated that the motion of particles within their simulation, and thus their energy, is related to the distance between the points of the lattice: the smaller the grid size, the higher the energy particles can have.

Models of mountain (alpine) glaciers are applied to solve similar problems to those models used for polar ice sheets, but typically have a higher resolution (a smaller grid size) and need to consider the effects of steep and often variable bed slopes, and the transverse stresses found in valley glaciers.

Just the fact that I can get rid of the top bar on my phone or make the grid any size I want (that's one thing I was laughing at about the iPhone5 launch «OOooh!

On the maker, one can only choose the number of cards not the grid size, but you state under variations that it can be reduced from the usual 5 × 5.

Or do any of the models out there dynamically change the grid size, keeping the total number of points the same, but putting more grid points in at places where gradients in variables are largest?

Or perhaps the theory only really applies at scales much smaller than the model grid size.

As an example (and I don't have data, just a thought experiment), when we estimate average global temperature and we grid up the planet, how do we test that the grid size is appropriate to sample?

The main reason for a limit to how small I would say is that for every halving of the grid size you have 16x as much work (cube 1/2 on a side and your timestep has to halve at least).

When GCMs are used to model atmospheric conditions and spatial grid size is reduced is there a scale at which chaotic conditions prevail and make modeling difficult in the same way that weather is harder to model than climate?

My point was that attempting to model the world climate response to increasing CO2 levels with a model that has the grid size small enough to model thunderstorms is not feasible.

I think the modelers know their model grid size is too big to model tornados or thunderstorms.

Reduce the grid size to — e.g., 50 - instead 210 - kilometer squares.

There are many diverse limitations on models — computer power and grid size, processes that happens at sub-grid scale and how well they are defined, how well known the starting point or boundary conditions are, etc..

The first model appeared in the late 1960's and the emphasis has been on reducing grid size as computer power increased and on implementing plausible phyics.

Now seriously, other than chaotic nature of the equations, which Robert explains nicely, there are also problems with a grid size which is too coarse for reliable predictions, and problems with approximations used.

However, as Essex and McKitrick point out in the chapter on «Climate Theory versus Models and Metaphors» in their book «Taken by Storm,» that no computer model has a grid size small enough to include any of them.

Say the grid size is 100 by 100 kilometers.

And clouds being much smaller than the spatial scale, they must be averaged to at least one grid size (which are still a couple of orders of magnitude larger), hence my «tunable average cloudiness parameter» statement.

The resolution of the models is far too course (the «grid size» is too large) to actually model could behavior directly, and even if that were possible, the computing resources would be astronopmical... far beyond the range of any existing (or near future) computer).

While these high resolution models don't resolve all of the vertical transports, global models with horizontal grid size of 1 km or so will clearly help a lot.

You have to get the horizontal grid size down well below the vertical scale of the atmosphere — the tropopause height or the scale height — to begin to resolve these small - scale motions.

The narratives decribing parameterizations in papers discussing climate models themselves don't seem to suggest LES like parameterization, as the parameterization does not depend on the computational grid size of the length scale of the turbulent like motions.

Convection can not be explicitly resolved in general circulation models given their typical grid size of 50 km or larger.

The model outputs are generally presented as an average of an ensemble of individual runs (and even ensembles of individual runs from multiple models), in order to remove this variability from the overall picture, because among grownups it is understood that 1) the long term trends are what we're interested and 2) the coarseness of our measurements of initial conditions combined with a finite modeled grid size means that models can not predict precisely when and how temps will vary around a trend in the real world (they can, however, by being run many times, give us a good idea of the * magnitude * of that variance, including how many years of flat or declining temperatures we might expect to see pop up from time to time).