If you use these phrases, you are not doing the best you can. That`s where I left and I used that word well, but only because I`m asking you all to do a good job. I can`t be quantitative. While we are at it, we are moving the words “good” and “bad” away from the scientific literature in almost all cases. Science is not a place of value judgment. Judgments, of course. Opinions, observations and speculations are all correct when identified as such. (“We believe… is a perfectly legitimate way to start a sentence if you have to tell the reader that you don`t know something safe.) Either your data matches something or it`s not. She accepts the simulation in the estimated uncertainty or she does not agree.
This is consistent with Dr. X`s prediction in the 5% or not. None of us know what you think is a good deal or why, until you give us a number that we could replicate or understand. Let`s be honest, these sentences don`t make sense and, in my opinion, they have no place in the scientific literature. I used them in papers before realizing they have no value. If the agreement is good, tell us how much: use a number, an RMS, a percentage, etc. One researcher`s “good agreement” is the “non-converging” of another. Is your approval good for a picometer? Or, just because it`s better than the errors you saw when you collected the first data? Is your data “qualitative” because the spikes are more or less tail and the slope is about the same? I might get a little bit of a fad if the “good deal” is somehow related to the word “qualitative.” .
Результатов: 33. Точных совпадений: 33. Затраченное время: 125 мс Индекс слова: 1-300, 301-600, 601-900, Больше.