Showing 1,401 - 1,420 results of 31,185 for search '(( 50 ((we decrease) OR (mean decrease)) ) OR ( 100 ((ng decrease) OR (a decrease)) ))', query time: 0.95s Refine Results
  1. 1401
  2. 1402
  3. 1403

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  4. 1404

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  5. 1405

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  6. 1406

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  7. 1407

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  8. 1408

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  9. 1409

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  10. 1410

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  11. 1411

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  12. 1412

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  13. 1413

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  14. 1414

    Recombination of Autodissociated Water Ions in a Nanoscale Pure Water Droplet by Soonho Kwon (1402972)

    Published 2025
    “…We found that the self-diffusion of water dramatically decreases in droplets with a diameter below 2.2 nm. …”
  15. 1415

    S1 File - by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

    Published 2024
    “…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”
  16. 1416

    Detailed information on field experiments. by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

    Published 2024
    “…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”
  17. 1417

    List of symbols used in this study. by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

    Published 2024
    “…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”
  18. 1418

    Data sources for calibration and evaluation. by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

    Published 2024
    “…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”
  19. 1419
  20. 1420