Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1098/rsos.160600 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1098/rsos.160600 C5319323!5319323!28280557     free     free     free Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=28280557&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       R+Soc+Open+Sci 2017 ; 4 (1): ä Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=28280557|t=2017. Not Normal: the uncertainties of scientific measurements |pdf=|usr=}}{{28280557}} gab.com Text Not Normal: the uncertainties of scientific measurements JO: R Soc Open Sci http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=28280557 #FOAvip Judging the significance and reproducibility of quantitative research requires a good understanding of relevant uncertainties, but it is often unclear how well these have been evaluated and what they imply. Reported scientific uncertainties were studied by analysing 41?000 measurements of 3200 quantities from medicine, nuclear and particle physics, and interlaboratory comparisons ranging from chemistry to toxicology. Outliers are common, with 5? disagreements up to five orders of magnitude more frequent than naively expected. Uncertainty-normalized differences between multiple measurements of the same quantity are consistent with heavy-tailed Student?s t-distributions that are often almost Cauchy, far from a Gaussian Normal bell curve. Medical research uncertainties are generally as well evaluated as those in physics, but physics uncertainty improves more rapidly, making feasible simple significance criteria such as the 5? discovery convention in particle physics. Contributions to measurement uncertainty from mistakes and unknown problems are not completely unpredictable. Such errors appear to have power-law distributions consistent with how designed complex systems fail, and how unknown systematic errors are constrained by researchers. This better understanding may help improve analysis and meta-analysis of data, and help scientists and the public have more realistic expectations of what scientific results imply. Twit Text FOAVip Not Normal: the uncertainties of scientific measurements ????R Soc Open Sci http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=28280557 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=28280557 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|28280557}}</ref> Not Normal: the uncertainties of scientific measurements #MMPMID28280557 Bailey DC R Soc Open Sci 2017[Jan]; 4 (1): ä PMID28280557show ga Judging the significance and reproducibility of quantitative research requires a good understanding of relevant uncertainties, but it is often unclear how well these have been evaluated and what they imply. Reported scientific uncertainties were studied by analysing 41?000 measurements of 3200 quantities from medicine, nuclear and particle physics, and interlaboratory comparisons ranging from chemistry to toxicology. Outliers are common, with 5? disagreements up to five orders of magnitude more frequent than naively expected. Uncertainty-normalized differences between multiple measurements of the same quantity are consistent with heavy-tailed Student?s t-distributions that are often almost Cauchy, far from a Gaussian Normal bell curve. Medical research uncertainties are generally as well evaluated as those in physics, but physics uncertainty improves more rapidly, making feasible simple significance criteria such as the 5? discovery convention in particle physics. Contributions to measurement uncertainty from mistakes and unknown problems are not completely unpredictable. Such errors appear to have power-law distributions consistent with how designed complex systems fail, and how unknown systematic errors are constrained by researchers. This better understanding may help improve analysis and meta-analysis of data, and help scientists and the public have more realistic expectations of what scientific results imply. äNot Normal: the uncertainties of scientific measurements (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing