Search alternatives:
values decrease » values increased (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
i values » _ values (Expand Search)
a larger » a large (Expand Search), _ larger (Expand Search), _ large (Expand Search)
values decrease » values increased (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
i values » _ values (Expand Search)
a larger » a large (Expand Search), _ larger (Expand Search), _ large (Expand Search)
-
21
-
22
-
23
-
24
Modelled policy outcomes, with posterior values for individual nodes ranked from 1-5 across the parties - Green, Reform UK, Liberal Democrat, Conservative, and Labour, where 1 is the lowest rank and 5 is the highest. The parties are ranked for each policy node in the network (e.g., income tax), based on the direction of change (“performance indicator”) stated in the first column (e.g., lowest, highest, most, improvement). For example, a value of 5 for Green tax means that green tax is lowest under Reform UK’s policies, while a value of 1 means that green tax is highest under the Green Party’s policies. Larger text in bold and italic font indicates that the directional change (i.e., increase or decrease) of a node under a party’s policies is consistent with the direction indicated, whereas black text indicates an opposite directional change (e.g., income tax is predicted to decrease under Reform UK in alignment with the performance indicator, and increase under Green and Labour).
Published 2025“…Larger text in bold and italic font indicates that the directional change (i.e., increase or decrease) of a node under a party’s policies is consistent with the direction indicated, whereas black text indicates an opposite directional change (e.g., income tax is predicted to decrease under Reform UK in alignment with the performance indicator, and increase under Green and Labour).…”
-
25
-
26
-
27
-
28
-
29
-
30
-
31
-
32
-
33
AUC statistics as calculated from simulated time series. Each statistical metric was calculated within sliding windows, throughout the pre-critical interval. We considered five-, fifteen-, and thirty-day sliding windows. Given that the temperature of the system increased to 12°C on day sixty, we also considered three pre-critical intervals: Days 1 to 60, Days 20 to 60, and Days 30 to 60. To evaluate trends in these metrics, we calculated Kendall’s rank correlation coefficient during the pre-critical interval, and compared control (constant temperature, non-epidemic) and warming (warming treatment, epidemic emergence) coefficients across simulations and experimental populations by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) statistic. Values less than 0.5 suggest that a decrease in the statistical metric indicates emergence, while values greater than 0.5 suggest that an increase in the statistical metric indicates emergence, with more extreme values indicating stronger tre
Published 2025“…Values less than 0.5 suggest that a decrease in the statistical metric indicates emergence, while values greater than 0.5 suggest that an increase in the statistical metric indicates emergence, with more extreme values indicating stronger tre</p>…”
-
34
-
35
Statistical analysis of the AUC measurement.
Published 2025“…<p>Analysis indicated that INSv application significantly changed spontaneous calcium activity (IAsp <i>p</i>-value: 0.1290, INSv <i>p</i>-value: 0.0002). …”
-
36
-
37
-
38
-
39
-
40