Sentences with phrase «same data set»

They should both at least use the same data set!

Given this, were researchers all working from the same data set or were they using whatever data was available on whatever platform?

The application of the same or similar algorithms to different data sets, or even the same data set processed in different ways, may in fact create a different result worthy of constitutional protection.

This is the same data set used by much of the climate science cabal, agenda - driven politicians and the alarmist mainstream media to claim the «Hottest Year Ever» meme.

There are many other ways to compare methodologies without using the same data set.

I'm not sure we've learn very much by comparing two stations both coming from probably the same data set, other than BEST homogenization gives virtually the same result as GHCN.

Comparing methodologies by using them on the same data set is a useful way of testing them.

If you want to know whether BEST or GISS smoothes its data more, you do not need to use the same data set.

However, if this was correct reasoning one could claim with equal validity, using the same data set and time period, that there has been global warming over the recent 20 - year period, since the trend is also not statistically significantly distinguishable from the trend estimate over the time period since 1979 («global warming» is the Null - hypothesis in this case), which itself is highly statistically significantly different from a Zero - trend (RSS: 0.124 + / -0.067 deg.

The message I got is that the new method gets similar results as the old method provided the the new method is applied to exactly the same data set as the old method.

The USHCNv2 station temperature data in this study is identical to the data used in Fall et al. (2011), coming from the same data set.

If I wanted to do this, I could demonstrate, for example, with the same data set that from 1980 to 1995 that it's equally flat.

If a neutral and qualified researcher says, «I followed your method with the same data set and got X where you got Y» then certainly further investigation is necessary.

How can two major agencies HadCRUT and GISS produce such different results, supposedly from the same data set?

And I also believe it is largely the same data set used in CLIMAP.

Population of Cats The most obvious blunder: Citing what seems to be the same data set («the US feline population has tripled over the last four decades») I referred to in my «Spoiler Alert» post, Butler arrives not at 90 million or so, as indicated in the original source [1], or even the bogus 150 million figure the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Tom Will tried to sell last year to the Bird Conservation Alliance.

The important point is this: in the case of a positively skewed distribution, the back - transformed mean will always be less than the simple mean of the same data set.

This is echoed by a chart from Wade Pfau using the same data set.

I did a variety of experiments using the same data set as before, melding the Moody's Bond yields with Robert Shiller's S&P 500 data.

«With full vehicle performance capability as an EV, a 35 mile E-REV is found to provide up to 40 - times more all - electric trips than a PHEV over the same data set.»

The graphs below come from the same data set.

If social scientists can reach opposite conclusions from the same data set, then research, even from randomized field trials, may do little to inform policy debates.

And I also believe it is largely the same data set used in CLIMAP.

Now, using the same data set, they decided to reanalyze Chilesaurus.

It's higher, too, than the average mercury levels in canned albacore (white) tuna in the same data set.

That same data set shows a 40 % transfer rate for CNMs doing home births, which is similar to the transfer rate in places like the UK, where home birth providers are a «real» part of the healthcare system.

Two and a half years later, the same social science journal that published the original study publishes a «re-analysis» of the very same data set (that's right, no new data collection, just reinterpretation of the admittedly valid stuff).

William Chip and I draw different inferences and conclusions from the same data set.

This ubiquity means that developers use SQL to log, record, alter, and present data within the application, while analysts use SQL to interrogate that same data set in order to find deeper insights.

More recent studies from the Educational Testing Service, Notre Dame, and Stanford looked at the same data sets and came to similar conclusions.

If Forest, Stone and Sokolov wish to save face, in the instance that the original data can not be located and shared with the journal editor and study auditors, they could simply re-do the paper, with the same data sets extended to present time, and replicate their own results, publishing a new paper.

Similarly, NASA GISTEMP is largely based on the same data sets used by NOAA GlobalTemp.

Here are the trends with the 2 - sigma ranges for the same data sets from above for this time period, using the trend calculator at http://www.skepticalscience.com/trend.php again:

Then about three years ago, those same scientists, using those same data sets, admitted there was a pause, and spent their energy explaining why it didn't matter (ocean heat content being a better proxy was the most popular).

However, tossing out these same data sets results in the deflation of the temperature reconstruction calculations for the Medieval Warm Period.

I also noticed Steven is using the same wrong arguments about needing the same data sets.

Not exact matches

For the most part, it's offering a lot of the same data - conservation options that are already available for Android but are hidden in various settings menus.

The updated numbers are not directly comparable to the ones in the AER study, but they show the same trends over the periods in which the two data sets overlap.

Using the same data and fit criteria - with an ABM approach - we saw 7 TIMES more meetings set in our ABE target group even though both groups engaged with us at the same rate.

It has claimed it won't give US and Canadian users second tier status where their privacy is concerned — saying they're getting the same «settings and controls» — but unless or until US lawmakers spill some ink of their own there's nothing but an embarrassing PR message to regulate what Facebook chooses to do with Americans» data.

An index is generated using each of the three data sets per market, applying the same repeat - sales methodology -LSB-...]

To be sure, no two occasions begin with the same toted set of data, but two occasions may well begin with some data in common.

In instances in which the 1995 ABS data set did not specify the RSE (i.e., the percentage of energy that was derived from SSBs plus 100 % juice, soft drinks, sugary products, confectionery, and alcoholic beverages and the percentage of sugars as soft drinks), the RSE was assumed to be the same as in 2011 — 2012.

For a significantly larger data set, look at CL semifinal appearances in the same time span.

All sorts of hilarious errors — using one type of data (ICD10 code data from «white healthy women» and essentially comparing the best possible data from one set of hospital data related to low - risk births to the worst possible single set of data related to high - risk at - home births)-- if you use the writer's same data source for hospital births but include all comers in 2007 - 2010 (not just low - risk healthy white women), the infant death rate is actually 6.14 per 1000, which is «300 % higher death rate than at - home births!»

In hospital settings, health records staff abstract data from the BCRCP forms in the same manner and submit their databases to the BCRCP.

Then you have to ask whose data retention law applies and we can find a situation in which multiple countries are trying to apply their laws to the same set of data, at the same time.

The same controversial and sweeping powers on data retention were added to the Investigatory Powers Act (AKA the Snoopers» Charter), which passed into law late last year a matter of weeks before Dripa — which at the insistence of the Liberal Democrats had a built - in self - distruct date of 31 December, 2016 — was set to expire.

The Berkeley study, which comes ahead of a UK government investigation into the same issue, actually saw the authors visit each of the houses in their data set.

This decision affirms and applies a fair standard to the drawing of state legislative districts and makes it easier for counties to do the same by providing them with an accurate data set.»