Testing the precision of bioevents

2009 ◽  
Vol 146 (5) ◽  
pp. 625-637 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. R. C. PAUL ◽  
M. A. LAMOLDA
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Intervals ◽  
First Occurrence ◽  
Alternative Test ◽  
Earlier Application

AbstractDeciding which of two bioevents is the less diachronous is a common problem in biostratigraphy. The most accurate correlation uses the finest timescale available. Chemostratigraphy or cyclostratigraphy offer a potential precision of about 10 ka. Graphic correlation can then be used to test the precision of bioevents and to quantify any mismatch. It can also be used to determine in which section any event occurs earlier. Application of these ideas to correlation of the Cenomanian–Turonian and Coniacian–Santonian boundaries demonstrates that some bioevents are as precise as chemo- and cyclostratigraphy, but that most are not. Two problems occur with bioevents. First they may not be recognizable in all sections. Second, where they are recognizable, they may be diachronous. In the former case, calculating confidence intervals on known ranges in sections where the relevant fossil has been recorded is an alternative test. Large confidence intervals suggest that both first and last occurrences of a fossil may be diachronous bioevents. At the Cenomanian–Turonian boundary the following bioevents (in stratigraphic order) appear to be reliable time planes for international correlation. The last occurrences of (1) Corolithion kennedyi, (2) Rotalipora greenhornensis, (3) Axopodorhabdus albianus, (4) Rotalipora cushmani, (5) Lithraphidites acutus, (6) Microstaurus chiastius and (7) the first occurrence of Quadrum gartneri. At the Coniacian–Santonian boundary only the first and last occurrences of Platyceramus undulatoplicatus, and the first occurrences of Platyceramus cycloides and Lucianorhabdus cayeuxii have been identified as potentially reliable bioevents.

Resources: Internet Resources for the Independent Medical Evaluator – 2007

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Jenny Walker
Keyword(s):  
Head Trauma ◽  
Clonic Seizure ◽  
Acute Subdural Hematoma ◽  
Orbital Fracture ◽  
Orbital Wall ◽  
First Occurrence ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One ◽  
Neurological Injuries ◽  
Medial Orbital Wall

Abstract Rating patients with head trauma and multiple neurological injuries can be challenging. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, Section 13.2, Criteria for Rating Impairment Due to Central Nervous System Disorders, outlines the process to rate impairment due to head trauma. This article summarizes the case of a 57-year-old male security guard who presents with headache, decreased sensation on the left cheek, loss of sense of smell, and problems with memory, among other symptoms. One year ago the patient was assaulted while on the job: his Glasgow Coma Score was 14; he had left periorbital ecchymosis and a 2.5 cm laceration over the left eyelid; a small right temporoparietal acute subdural hematoma; left inferior and medial orbital wall fractures; and, four hours after admission to the hospital, he experienced a generalized tonic-clonic seizure. This patient's impairment must include the following components: single seizure, orbital fracture, infraorbital neuropathy, anosmia, headache, and memory complaints. The article shows how the ratable impairments are combined using the Combining Impairment Ratings section. Because this patient has not experienced any seizures since the first occurrence, according to the AMA Guides he is not experiencing the “episodic neurological impairments” required for disability. Complex cases such as the one presented here highlight the need to use the criteria and estimates that are located in several sections of the AMA Guides.

A problem with confidence intervals.

1995 ◽  
Vol 50 (12) ◽  
pp. 1102-1103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Frick
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Intervals

A Note on Confidence Intervals and Model Specification

Marketing ZFP ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-42
Author(s):  
Thomas Otter
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Intervals ◽  
Generalized Linear Model ◽  
Statistical Information ◽  
Regression Coefficients ◽  
Model Specification ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Exploratory Research ◽  
Empirical Calibration ◽  
Credible Intervals ◽  
Model Structures

Empirical research in marketing often is, at least in parts, exploratory. The goal of exploratory research, by definition, extends beyond the empirical calibration of parameters in well established models and includes the empirical assessment of different model specifications. In this context researchers often rely on the statistical information about parameters in a given model to learn about likely model structures. An example is the search for the 'true' set of covariates in a regression model based on confidence intervals of regression coefficients. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate and compare different measures of statistical information about model parameters in the context of a generalized linear model: classical confidence intervals, bootstrapped confidence intervals, and Bayesian posterior credible intervals from a model that adapts its dimensionality as a function of the information in the data. I find that inference from the adaptive Bayesian model dominates that based on classical and bootstrapped intervals in a given model.

Development of Unit Commitment Model Considering Confidence Intervals of Photovoltaics Forecast and Analysis of a Large Scale Power System

2016 ◽  
Vol 136 (5) ◽  
pp. 484-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuke Udagawa ◽  
Kazuhiko Ogimoto ◽  
Takashi Oozeki ◽  
Hideaki Ohtake ◽  
Takashi Ikegami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Power System ◽  
Confidence Intervals ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Unit Commitment

Study of Alternative Test Method of Internal Arcing by Replacing SF6 with Air in SF6-Insulated Power Equipment

2018 ◽  
Vol 138 (11) ◽  
pp. 914-922
Author(s):  
Masashi Kotari ◽  
Tomo Tadokoro ◽  
Shin-ichi Tanaka ◽  
Mikimasa Iwata
Keyword(s):  
Test Method ◽  
Power Equipment ◽  
Alternative Test ◽  
Alternative Test Method

Pengembangan Instrumen Evaluasi Domain Afektif

1970 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-109
Author(s):  
Rohmad Qomari
Keyword(s):  
Instrument Development ◽  
Affective Domain ◽  
Specific Aspect ◽  
Cognitive Domain ◽  
Test Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Instrument ◽  
Reliable Instrument ◽  
Alternative Test ◽  
Psychomotor Domain

To carry out evaluation comprehensively, we need appropriate instrument that suitable with domain that being evaluated. Evaluation instrument development with test has been conducted by experts. These instruments were only suitable to measure cognitive domain and part of psychomotor domain. To measure affective domain, we need to develop non-test evaluation instrument (alternative test). The development of this instrument tends to more difficult and complicated compare with instrument test evaluation instrument. Therefore, it does necessitate a through study to derive and elaborate affective domain to specific aspect to develop valid and reliable instrument.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document