Sentences with phrase «known as data scientists»

Not exact matches

Last month, the panel of 31 independent scientists charged with reviewing the EPA's draft report stated that the agency's broad conclusion about the mining technique known as fracking is at odds with the evidence and «inconsistent with the observations, data, and levels of uncertainty presented.»

In addition to his post as a senior data scientist at Google, the value investing community knows him for his side gig: hosting the Investing Talks -LSB-...]

Scientists have learned that, all other things being equal, the simplest answer that fits all the data is generally the best one, a doctrine developed by a 14th century Franciscan friar and known as Occam's Razor.

The information collected will no doubt be particularly valuable once it's cross-referenced with satellite imagery and measurements, as well as with data on water quality and such collected by scientists working in the Gulf and on the coast.

Moreover, as a good scientist, Butz closed with a plea for more data «in order to know whether shortages of scientists and engineers are in fact developing and whether strategies to encourage their production are succeeding.»

That's a question that, as far as we know, the data scientists haven't analyzed yet.

By combining data from two high - energy accelerators, nuclear scientists have refined the measurement of a remarkable property of exotic matter known as quark - gluon plasma.

An international team of roughly 300 scientists known as the Enhancing Neuro Imaging Genetics through Meta Analysis (ENIGMA) Network pooled brain scans and genetic data worldwide to pinpoint genes that enhance or break down key brain regions in people from 33 countries.

«We know from a previous study based on OSDUHS data that as many as 20 per cent of adolescents in Ontario said they have experienced a traumatic brain injury in their lifetime,» said Dr. Robert Mann, senior scientist at CAMH and director of the OSDUHS.

A novel technique known as in - situ plasma processing is helping scientists get more neutrons and better data for their experiments at the Spallation Neutron Source at the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Scientists have long sought the answer to why these animals beach, and one recent collaboration hoped to find a clear - cut solution: Researchers from a cross-section of fields pooled massive data sets to see if disturbances to the magnetic field around Earth could be what confuses these sea creatures, known as cetaceans.

What Devadas and his collaborators — graduate students Ling Ren, Xiangyao Yu and Christopher Fletcher, and research scientist Marten van Dijk — do instead is to arrange memory addresses in a data structure known as a «tree.»

Kepler project scientist Nick Gautier of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory presented new data at the meeting on three of the larger planets in the Kepler - 20 system, now officially known as Kepler - 20b, -20 c and -20 d. From the star's wobbles, observed with ground - based telescopes, Gautier and his colleagues were able to deduce the masses of Kepler - 20b and -20 c: 8.7 and 16.1 Earth masses, respectively.

The cold and shadowy fringe of the solar system known as the Kuiper belt is generating increasing debate among scientists as data accumulates on the growing population of objects discovered there.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) lists both species as «data deficient» because scientists know so little about their populations or habitat.

In order to reinforce their results, the scientists compared their data with more than 200 bones from modern mammals, whose diet is known, as well as with fossil specimens from both carnivores and herbivores.

By spanning the past 7,000 years — part of a period known as the Holocene — the new study triples the amount of data available for scientists to analyse.

Michael Kelley, who is leading the TC4 observation campaign, said in a statement: «Scientists have always appreciated knowing when an asteroid will make a close approach to and safely pass the Earth because they can make preparations to collect data to characterize and learn as much as possible about it.

In addition to his post as a senior data scientist at Google, the value investing community knows him for his side gig: hosting the Investing Talks -LSB-...]

# 57, RE small numbers, I'm no climate scientist, but I do know statisticians have methods, such as Chi - square and log - linear analysis (based on odds ratios), that are quite successful on data sets with small numbers of observations.

But, as has been pointed out in poll surveys in the USA and elsewhere, many people no longer have confidence in climate scientists and their work (a US poll showed that close to 70 % of the respondents believed that climate scientists are fudging the data).

No - one here asked you to claim, based on your 46 years of experience as an aeronautical engineer, that you knew better than the actual scientists how to interpret their data so that it wasn't biased or «fraudulent.»

The tiny, close - knit clique of climate scientists who invented and now drive the «global warming» fraud — for fraud is what we now know it to be — tampered with temperature data so assiduously that, on the recent admission of one of them, land temperatures since 1980 have risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures.

What surprises me is that the real climate scientists, at least so far as I know, never attempt to answer questions relating to data archiving and related matters.

Not one of the people who they trot out as «eminent scientists» or «experts» have ever bothered to go out in the field; gather any real data; or even speak, in person (ie in the same room at the same time) to the people suffering the known and obvious adverse health effects caused by incessant low - frequency noise and infrasound.

Another presenter at the session, Paul Chang, a project scientist who studies satellite ocean surface wind data at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Weather and Climate Prediction in College Park, Md., said that the current method that is largely used by U.S. scientists in this area of research, known as the Dvorak technique, employs satellite imagery to estimate tropical cyclone intensity but is imprecise and subjective.

no matter what the evidence against, the theory is correct or the» I am not going to give you my data as you will poke holes in it»... that sort of position indicates the «scientist» has gone missing.

«2014 * is * the warmest year in the GISTEMP, NOAA and Berkeley Earth analyses,» he said, referring to different data sets kept by different groups of scientists, including the one kept by his center and known as «GISTEMP.»

As we know from the Climategate emails, CRU scientists stonewalled FOIA requests for years to prevent independent researchers from checking their data and methods.

I don't know, I'm not part of that conspiracy, and I see a lot of assertions on here and elsewhere by people who imply they are smart, or at least smart enough to know more on this issue than the climate scientists who actually professionally study it, who throw around large highfalutin science terms, but that repeatedly misconstrue the basic climate change issue itself, conflate the process of science with Climate Change refutation, seem to have an extensively poor understanding of the issue, and take small select bits of data as part of the ongoing total picture of increasing overall corroboration, to falsely equate that with a flaw in Climate Change theory itself, or as a referendum on it.

As we know from the Climategate emails, Phil Jones and CRU scientists stonewalled FOIA requests for years to prevent independent researchers from checking their data and methodologies.

As just one example; «How we can know an average global sea surface temperature back to 1850 when so much of the world was unexplored let alone its oceans measured» should be just one example that should make scientists question whether the models they build are actually using reliable data, or whether they think they already know the answer and therefore just use data that supports it, no matter its doubtful provenance.

«Let's be fair to Jones here; as a scientist, your data is invaluable; if you give it to someone else without knowing that they will give due credit to the source, then you're effectively giving away your work for free.

To get a clear sense of soot — which is known to scientists as black carbon — an international team of 31 atmospheric scientists has worked for the past four years to analyze all the data they could.

Maybe you know that already — there are alarming stories every day, like last month's satellite data showing the globe warming, since 1998, more than twice as fast as scientists had thought.

Due to the lack of a good explanation for this onset of cooling, an objective scientist should select the fully formed theory A as more plausible unless good evidence was forthcoming for the alternative half - theory B. Hansen, of course, already knows that CO2 sensitivity is high because the heating half - cycle of the paleo data tells him so.

The focus of the e-mail hacking incident commonly known as «climategate» has shifted to whether scientists at East Anglia's Climate Research Unit threw away raw temperature data.

When even genuine climate scientists can not get a short article published, that tries make other climate scientists aware of data that might have a slightly negative effect on AGW theory (as in the CO2 warming might not be as bad as predicted by climate models), well, you know for certain that climate science is no - longer functioning as a science.

The most unforgiveable unethical behavior surrounding the entire issue of «hiding the decline» and similar biases in published research, is when climate change scientists who know about their — «cherry picking the data», — biased and selective presentation of all data pertinent to published paper conclusions, and — outright errors in their data and peer - reviewed papers, don't speak out loudly in the media outlets that have misled the general public in reporting about their flawed, misleading research, as well as, associated journals and professional societies, to stop politicians and government regulators from using their flawed and misleading research results to pass laws and regulations that have severe effects on the prosperity and quality of life of their fellow citizens of the US and the world.

Personally, I prefer to credit the analysis of people who actually know how to interpret the raw data, ie — climate scientists — over the opinion of someone with no expertise in the science, such as yourself, for instance.

Verily, previously known as Google Life Sciences is about to change the world by engaging chemists, engineers, doctors and behavioural scientists into their interdisciplinary efforts to use data to identify symptoms of health and diseases.

There are multiple positions available for business analysts as well as data scientists that need to know SAP S4 / Hana.