Propagation of Errors in Orbits Computed from Density Layer Models

Author(s):  
Foster Morrison
Author(s):  
John Charles Waterton

Abstract Objective To determine the variability, and preferred values, for normal liver longitudinal water proton relaxation rate R1 in the published literature. Methods Values of mean R1 and between-subject variance were obtained from literature searching. Weighted means were fitted to a heuristic and to a model. Results After exclusions, 116 publications (143 studies) remained, representing apparently normal liver in 3392 humans, 99 mice and 249 rats. Seventeen field strengths were included between 0.04 T and 9.4 T. Older studies tended to report higher between-subject coefficients of variation (CoV), but for studies published since 1992, the median between-subject CoV was 7.4%, and in half of those studies, measured R1 deviated from model by 8.0% or less. Discussion The within-study between-subject CoV incorporates repeatability error and true between-subject variation. Between-study variation also incorporates between-population variation, together with bias from interactions between methodology and physiology. While quantitative relaxometry ultimately requires validation with phantoms and analysis of propagation of errors, this survey allows investigators to compare their own R1 and variability values with the range of existing literature.


2013 ◽  
Vol 69 (10) ◽  
pp. 1865-1866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariusz Jaskolski

The policy of the Protein Data Bank (PDB) that the first deposition of a small-molecule ligand, even with erroneous atom numbering, sets a precedent over accepted nomenclature rules is disputed. Recommendations regarding ligand molecules in the PDB are suggested.


2004 ◽  
Vol 443-444 ◽  
pp. 71-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathalie Audebrand ◽  
Daniel Louër

The theoretical background currently used in line profile analysis is reviewed. It covers the size and structure imperfection effects at the origin of diffraction line broadening. The propagation of errors, i.e. old errors and new errors related to profile fitting techniques, is commented. The experimental conditions for minimising errors are described. Representative examples of microstructure characterisation of nanopowders are presented.


Science ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 313 (5791) ◽  
pp. 1236a-1236a ◽  
Author(s):  
T. J. Katz

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document