Search alternatives:
significantly longer » significantly lower (Expand Search), significantly larger (Expand Search), significantly higher (Expand Search)
better decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search), between decreased (Expand Search)
longer decrease » larger decrease (Expand Search), linear decrease (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
significantly longer » significantly lower (Expand Search), significantly larger (Expand Search), significantly higher (Expand Search)
better decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search), between decreased (Expand Search)
longer decrease » larger decrease (Expand Search), linear decrease (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
-
2161
-
2162
-
2163
-
2164
-
2165
-
2166
-
2167
-
2168
-
2169
-
2170
-
2171
-
2172
-
2173
-
2174
-
2175
-
2176
Neutrophil Superoxide anion production, Heat map for gene expression from neutrophils of CGD patients, and PCA plot for genome-wide gene expression.
Published 2025“…Bars and brackets represent mean ± SEM with the number of patients studied below. …”
-
2177
Microhardness vs. depth diagram of sample No. 6 (
Published 2025“…<div><p>This study investigates the effects of arc length, current intensity, travel speed, gas flow rate, and pulse time on surface hardness to better understand the arc quenching of S45C steel with a curved shape. …”
-
2178
Fig 8 -
Published 2024“…Although ring category has a greater effect on these measures than the cross-sectional area, the area also affects the results: Increasing the cross-sectional area of the ring causes the cornea to flatten, resulting in a decrease in K<sub>mean</sub> and axial length. The cornea also becomes thinner when larger rings are used and the contact pressure between the ring and the cornea increases. …”
-
2179
Addressing Imbalanced Classification Problems in Drug Discovery and Development Using Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, AutoGluon-Tabular, and H2O AutoML
Published 2025“…The important findings of our studies are as follows: (i) there is no effect of threshold optimization on ranking metrics such as AUC and AUPR, but AUC and AUPR get affected by class-weighting and SMOTTomek; (ii) for ML methods RF and SVM, significant percentage improvement up to 375, 33.33, and 450 over all the data sets can be achieved, respectively, for F1 score, MCC, and balanced accuracy, which are suitable for performance evaluation of imbalanced data sets; (iii) for AutoML libraries AutoGluon-Tabular and H2O AutoML, significant percentage improvement up to 383.33, 37.25, and 533.33 over all the data sets can be achieved, respectively, for F1 score, MCC, and balanced accuracy; (iv) the general pattern of percentage improvement in balanced accuracy is that the percentage improvement increases when the class ratio is systematically decreased from 0.5 to 0.1; in the case of F1 score and MCC, maximum improvement is achieved at the class ratio of 0.3; (v) for both ML and AutoML with balancing, it is observed that any individual class-balancing technique does not outperform all other methods on a significantly higher number of data sets based on F1 score; (vi) the three external balancing techniques combined outperformed the internal balancing methods of the ML and AutoML; (vii) AutoML tools perform as good as the ML models and in some cases perform even better for handling imbalanced classification when applied with imbalance handling techniques. …”
-
2180