Search alternatives:
greater decrease » greatest decrease (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search), greater disease (Expand Search)
less decrease » teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search), levels decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
greater decrease » greatest decrease (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search), greater disease (Expand Search)
less decrease » teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search), levels decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
-
1081
Prisma flow diagram of study selection.
Published 2025“…Additionally, watching ≥6 hours of television per day was associated with a significant decrease in cognitive score (standardized beta coefficient = −0.09; 95% CI: −0.17, −0.003; I<sup>2</sup> = 71.8%; seven studies). …”
-
1082
-
1083
-
1084
-
1085
-
1086
Medicare clozapine data analysis.
Published 2025“…We observed a steady decrease in clozapine use adjusted for population (−18.0%) and spending (−24.9%) over time. …”
-
1087
-
1088
Major hyperparameters of RF-SVR.
Published 2024“…For instance, the RF-MLPR model achieved a 3.7%–6.5% improvement in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) metric across four hydrological stations compared to the RF-SVR model. (4) Prediction accuracy decreased with longer forecast periods, with the R<sup>2</sup> value dropping from 0.8886 for a 1-month forecast to 0.6358 for a 12-month forecast, indicating the increasing challenge of long-term predictions due to greater uncertainty and the accumulation of influencing factors over time. (5) The RF-MLPR model outperformed the RF-SVR model, demonstrating a superior ability to capture the complex, nonlinear relationships inherent in the data. …”
-
1089
Pseudo code for coupling model execution process.
Published 2024“…For instance, the RF-MLPR model achieved a 3.7%–6.5% improvement in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) metric across four hydrological stations compared to the RF-SVR model. (4) Prediction accuracy decreased with longer forecast periods, with the R<sup>2</sup> value dropping from 0.8886 for a 1-month forecast to 0.6358 for a 12-month forecast, indicating the increasing challenge of long-term predictions due to greater uncertainty and the accumulation of influencing factors over time. (5) The RF-MLPR model outperformed the RF-SVR model, demonstrating a superior ability to capture the complex, nonlinear relationships inherent in the data. …”
-
1090
Major hyperparameters of RF-MLPR.
Published 2024“…For instance, the RF-MLPR model achieved a 3.7%–6.5% improvement in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) metric across four hydrological stations compared to the RF-SVR model. (4) Prediction accuracy decreased with longer forecast periods, with the R<sup>2</sup> value dropping from 0.8886 for a 1-month forecast to 0.6358 for a 12-month forecast, indicating the increasing challenge of long-term predictions due to greater uncertainty and the accumulation of influencing factors over time. (5) The RF-MLPR model outperformed the RF-SVR model, demonstrating a superior ability to capture the complex, nonlinear relationships inherent in the data. …”
-
1091
Results of RF algorithm screening factors.
Published 2024“…For instance, the RF-MLPR model achieved a 3.7%–6.5% improvement in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) metric across four hydrological stations compared to the RF-SVR model. (4) Prediction accuracy decreased with longer forecast periods, with the R<sup>2</sup> value dropping from 0.8886 for a 1-month forecast to 0.6358 for a 12-month forecast, indicating the increasing challenge of long-term predictions due to greater uncertainty and the accumulation of influencing factors over time. (5) The RF-MLPR model outperformed the RF-SVR model, demonstrating a superior ability to capture the complex, nonlinear relationships inherent in the data. …”
-
1092
Schematic diagram of the basic principles of SVR.
Published 2024“…For instance, the RF-MLPR model achieved a 3.7%–6.5% improvement in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) metric across four hydrological stations compared to the RF-SVR model. (4) Prediction accuracy decreased with longer forecast periods, with the R<sup>2</sup> value dropping from 0.8886 for a 1-month forecast to 0.6358 for a 12-month forecast, indicating the increasing challenge of long-term predictions due to greater uncertainty and the accumulation of influencing factors over time. (5) The RF-MLPR model outperformed the RF-SVR model, demonstrating a superior ability to capture the complex, nonlinear relationships inherent in the data. …”
-
1093
-
1094
-
1095
-
1096
-
1097
-
1098
-
1099
-
1100