Sentences with phrase «measurement error by»

The detection of gene — environment interaction for continuous traits: Should we deal with measurement error by bigger studies or better measurement?

The detection of gene - environment interaction for continuous traits: Should we deal with measurement error by bigger studies or better measurement?

Improvements in methods and equipment, processes of maintenance and calibration as well as a vastly better understanding of measurement methods have reduced the measurement errors by an order of magnitude over those years.

Not exact matches

Provincial instructors focused on two main areas: document use, aimed at helping workers better understand specialized blueprints, and numeracy, aimed at reducing the measurement errors caused by metric - trained employees working in an imperial - measurement environment.

In Facebook's case, the issue is complicated by the fact that the social network has repeatedly had to admit errors in its audience - measurement analytics, including over-estimating video views for more than two years.

It is also possible, the report said, that inspectors changed data to adjust errors by measurement equipment.

Second, because both weight measurement and feeding practice were reported by mothers, reporting errors may have occurred.

By reducing those errors, they increased the accuracy of the greenness measurements over the Amazon.

Measurements of such precision, stretching over so many light - years, can be thrown off by the smallest errors, Cowie points out.

Some physicists grumbled over the 19 percent margin of error associated with the frame - dragging measurement, but Everitt stands by his results.

We can confirm this by doing statistics for a lot of measurements and calculate the statistical standard error of the mean, which in our case is 850 zeptoseconds.»

By aiming at the atoms from opposite directions simultaneously, the laser arrangement cancels a major source of measurement error — the Doppler shift, or the change in the atoms» apparent resonant frequency as they interact and move with the laser light.

Estimating the errors inherent in the kind of measurements used by Maciejewski and his co-authors is a tough thing to do, Bean says; if the actual errors in the data were larger than the researchers had accounted for, the variations in the observed transit times could vanish.

Because the signals arriving at a receiver from all satellites are measured at the same time, the distance measurements are all falsified by the same receiver clock error, which must be calculated in order to determine an accurate position.

Naturally this article fails to mention that since the hydrosphere is 271 times as massive as the atmosphere, if oceans are absorbing the heat they are likely to moderate AGW into a nonproblem, as the average ocean temperature has only changed by.1 degrees in 50 years, an amount that is probably smaller than measurement error.

Radio telescopes, including major facilities of the National Science Foundation's National Radio Astronomy Observatory, have provided data needed to measure the winds encountered by the Huygens spacecraft as it descended through the atmosphere of Saturn's moon Titan last month — measurements feared lost because of a communication error between Huygens and its mother ship Cassini.

They revised an earlier HIPPARCOS parallax estimate of l02 ly made in the 1990s that had an error margin (Plx = 31.92 + / - 0.51 mas) just big enough to suggest that the star may actually lie about 100 ly away, in agreement with Earth - based parallax measurements computed before 1978 as reported by Robert Burnham, Jr. (1931 - 93).

Adding a circular fiber to the fiber train further increases the scrambling gain to $ > $ 20,000, limited by laboratory measurement error.

And by increasing the dynamic stiffness we can nearly eliminate the effect of electrostatic forces between the sample and cantilever body, which are major sources of error in today's PFM measurements, as mentioned.»

Second, biomarker concentrations were assessed only once, and dietary assessments are inevitably affected by some measurement errors.

While an element of the unexplained variability will likely have arisen though measurement error, it is more likely that the variation occurred primarily through variation between performances within individuals, as snatch, clean and jerk, and total 1RM varies by around 2.3 — 2.7 % in elite Olympic weightlifters (McGuigan & Kane, 2004), although test - re-test reliability of the 1RM power clean is nearly perfect in adolescent male athletes, with ICC = 0.98, a standard error of measurement (SEM) of 2.9 kg and a smallest worthwhile change (SWC) of 8.0 kg (Faigenbaum et al. 2012).

(The year - to - year correlation is diminished by the fact that each single year is subject to measurement error.

All test results, including scores on tests designed by classroom teachers, are subject to the standard error of measurement.

Yet by better measurement we can reduce misclassification, and by better balancing the two types of errors and considering carefully the consequences of these errors, we can reduce the harm of misclassification.

While numerous papers have highlighted this imprecision, most studies of instability have not systematically considered the role of measurement error in estimates aside from the type that is caused by sampling error.

As with the cases discussed above, the differences could come from variations in teachers» true value - added across student groups or from measurement error enhanced by the small sample size.

While classification errors are an inescapable part of decisions that rely on grouping by teacher performance, better measurement of performance can reduce these errors.

In 2000, a scoring error by NCS - Pearson (now Pearson Educational Measurement) led to 8,000 Minnesota students being told they failed a state math test when they did not, in fact, fail it (some of those students weren't able to graduate from high school on time).

If interested, see the Review of Article # 1 — the introduction to the special issue here; see the Review of Article # 2 — on VAMs» measurement errors, issues with retroactive revisions, and (more) problems with using standardized tests in VAMs here; see the Review of Article # 3 — on VAMs» potentials here; see the Review of Article # 4 — on observational systems» potentials here; see the Review of Article # 5 — on teachers» perceptions of observations and student growth here; see the Review of Article (Essay) # 6 — on VAMs as tools for «egg - crate» schools here; see the Review of Article (Commentary) # 7 — on VAMs situated in their appropriate ecologies here; and see the Review of Article # 8, Part I — on a more research - based assessment of VAMs» potentials here and Part II on «a modest solution» provided to us by Linda Darling - Hammond here.

The research supports one conclusion: value - added scores for teachers of low - achieving students are underestimated, and value - added scores of teachers of high - achieving students are overestimated by models that control for only a few scores (or for only one score) on previous achievement tests without adjusting for measurement error.

From the intro, «An error by contractor SAS Institute Inc. forced the state to withdraw some key teacher performance measurements that it had posted online for teachers to review.

Our method generalizes the test - retest framework by allowing for i) growth or decay in knowledge and skills between tests, ii) tests being neither parallel nor vertically scaled, and iii) the degree of measurement error varying across tests.

The measurements brought back by Delambre and Méchain not only made science into a global enterprise and made possible our global economy, but also revolutionized our understanding of error.

Such results can be a real systematic effect, e.g., cooling by planted vegetation or the movement of a thermometer away from the urban center, or a random effect of unforced regional variability and measurement errors.

Whether you are gullible enough to accept the figures as accurate depends on how much credibility you put in the multitude of observational measurements taken by different methods over many decades by diverse groups of researchers that form a strong consilience of mutually supporting evidence for the validity of the estimates and the possible errors.

Mine won't change any actual measurement [I did make provision for correcting systemic errors, but following a comment by Nick Stokes I now feel that it is best not to make any changes at all.].

Generally, the remaining uncorrected effect from urban heat islands is now believed to be less than 0.1 C, and in some parts of the world it may be more than fully compensated for by other changes in measurement methods.4 Nevertheless, this remains an important source of uncertainty.The warming trend observed over the past century is too large to be easily dismissed as a consequence of measurement errors.

If you have errors in a measurement, it is revealed by a larger standard deviation in the results.

Morano said the «hottest year» was dealt with by scientists appearing in the film and that in any case, the declaration would only sneak above the margin of error for global land - based measurements.

While it is true that there are a host of different things that make up any given individual error estimate at any single point, that does not free us from the constraint imposed by the number of measurements.

But the SEM is standard deviation of the results divided by the number of measurements... so your individual errors are indeed accounted for, whether they are random or are from other sources.

The principal scientific objective is to make global SSS measurements over the ice - free oceans with 150 - km spatial resolution, and to achieve a measurement error less than 0.2 (PSS - 78 [practical salinity scale of 1978]-RRB- on a 30 - day time scale, taking into account all sensors and geophysical random errors and biases.Salinity is indeed a key indicator of the strength of the hydrologic cycle because it tracks the differences created by varying evaporation and precipitation, runoff, and ice processes.

Increasing the number of measurements in this case, does decrease the random component of the instrumental error by 1 / SQRT (n) where n is the the number of observations.

Since satellite data seemed free of many of the errors that affect surface measurements, these results were seized on by global warming «sceptics».

This noise is either systemic (caused by measurement errors, etc) or aleatory which is contributions from everything else we don't yet fully comprehend, or can't because of the shear number of other paths.

However the ARGO errors are much much smaller than the pre-ARGO measurements (maybe by two orders of magnitude, one for each temperature reading and one for the sparseness of sampling?).

now add in error bars, (and any proxy reconstruction will surely have bars broader than modern measurement by a factor of 10), and the claim that a MWP was warmer than TODAY falls apart immediately.

However, the consistency of the error for each year indicated by the parallel nature of the annual balance trendlines for the varying point networks suggests even greater accuracy was possible if the overall glacier balance distribution has been determined at some time using a denser measurement network (Figure 5).

If they measure temperature at depth and on the way up or down at various points, how would the temperature measurement be affected by errors in pressure / depth measurement?.

By adding 5 cm (or degrees, or whatever) to each measurement you are adding a systematic error.