96 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2023
  2. Aug 2023
  3. Jun 2023
    1. In particular, if one person is trying to teach another they should provide an informative sample, rather than a random one. So if a learner knows that they are being taught, they can assume that the sample is informative.

      Although we are talking about implicit pedagogy, this brings about the necessity to be explicit by providing informative samples when teaching. This brings to mind when teachers ask random questions instead of being explicit in their questioning as it relates to the desired learning outcome.

  4. May 2023
    1. Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinicalprediction model with a binary outcome

      Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinical prediction model with a binary outcome

  5. Mar 2022
  6. Jan 2022
  7. Dec 2021
  8. Oct 2021
  9. Sep 2021
    1. e decided to look at the experiences of women who had been primarily mothers and wives and were attempting to move into the labor market.

      Research sample: Women who were first mother's and wives entering the job market.

    Tags

    Annotators

  10. Jul 2021
    1. Alan McNally 💙. (2021, February 5). Our latest lab data for B.1.1.7 prevalence in Pillar 2 samples, as determined by SGTF. Clearly now plateauing at 80-90%. Which to me suggests there are other lineages as transmissible as B.1.1.7......... Https://t.co/toA0GyVsZz [Tweet]. @alanmcn1. https://twitter.com/alanmcn1/status/1357701944027004929

    1. case-driven trial was planned 205to accrue 130case

      What was the rationale for accrual of 130 cases has not been explained here. Would be nice to have that explanation. When the study parameters (95% confidence interval, 60% vaccine efficacy, 1% baseline attack rate) were applied to the WHO calculator obtained from here, the sample size turned out to be 86000, and when 80% confidence interval, 60% vaccine efficacy, and 1% baseline rate among unvaccinated) was used to assess sample size, it turned out to be 21000; in any case, the study then would be underpowered unless the rationale of 130 case accrual is made.<br> Why was not the WHO sample size estimator used?

  11. May 2021
  12. Apr 2021
  13. Mar 2021
    1. Buss, Lewis F., Carlos A. Prete, Claudia M. M. Abrahim, Alfredo Mendrone, Tassila Salomon, Cesar de Almeida-Neto, Rafael F. O. França, et al. ‘Three-Quarters Attack Rate of SARS-CoV-2 in the Brazilian Amazon during a Largely Unmitigated Epidemic’. Science 371, no. 6526 (15 January 2021): 288–92. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe9728.

  14. Feb 2021
    1. Hodcroft, E. B., Domman, D. B., Oguntuyo, K., Snyder, D. J., Diest, M. V., Densmore, K. H., Schwalm, K. C., Femling, J., Carroll, J. L., Scott, R. S., Whyte, M. M., Edwards, M. D., Hull, N. C., Kevil, C. G., Vanchiere, J. A., Lee, B., Dinwiddie, D. L., Cooper, V. S., & Kamil, J. P. (2021). Emergence in late 2020 of multiple lineages of SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein variants affecting amino acid position 677. MedRxiv, 2021.02.12.21251658. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.12.21251658

  15. Jan 2021
  16. Nov 2020
    1. This is a page note. I can write overall comments about the pre-print here.

      Tags can also be added below.

  17. Oct 2020
    1. The graphs of ground state confinement energy againstsize (radius) for zinc sulfide nanoparticles in Figure 14 showthe dependence of confinement on the size of quantum dots.The result shows that ground state confinement energy is

      Las graficas de la energía de confinamiento en su estado fundamental en contra del tamaño (radio) por nanopartículas de sulfato de zinc en la Figura 14 muestran la dependencia de confinamiento en el tamaño de los puntos quánticos. El resultado muestra que el estado fundamental de energía en confinamiento es inversamente proporciona al tamaño (radio). Por lo tanto, cuando uno incrementa su radio (tamaño) la energía de confinamiento decrece pero nunca llega a cero. Eso es, el energía mas baja posible para el punto quántica de muestra no es cero. El confinamiento comienza cuando el radio del punto cuántico de muestra es comparable o del orden del radio exciton de Bohr.

    1. We say that uu is ’a utility function for ≿\succsim.

      Does "u is a utility function for \($\succsim$\)" mean that the utility function 'represents' \($\succsim$\)/

    Tags

    Annotators

  18. Sep 2020
  19. Aug 2020
    1. Lednicky, J. A., Lauzardo, M., Fan, Z. H., Jutla, A. S., Tilly, T. B., Gangwar, M., Usmani, M., Shankar, S. N., Mohamed, K., Eiguren-Fernandez, A., Stephenson, C. J., Alam, M. M., Elbadry, M. A., Loeb, J. C., Subramaniam, K., Waltzek, T. B., Cherabuddi, K., Morris, J. G., & Wu, C.-Y. (2020). Viable SARS-CoV-2 in the air of a hospital room with COVID-19 patients. MedRxiv, 2020.08.03.20167395. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.03.20167395

  20. Jul 2020
  21. May 2020
  22. Apr 2020
  23. Mar 2020
    1. The standard error (the standard deviation of the distribution of sample means) has this formula:

      Tex command for the standard deviation of the sample mean

  24. Oct 2019
    1. “Yes, perhaps he has captured it.” A man sitting at a desk

      Annotation to an image? Perhaps for charts/graphs?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK3Tv-dEWjg

    1. I can't make an annotation on Google's documentation ( I think it's a Hypothesis bug ) but I've updated the linked code sample below to work as of 10/04/2019 with Python 3

      https://gist.github.com/technoplato/4d28f4f308ea7c5fe20bd23e751e9e60

  25. Dec 2018
    1. Image Score: How to Select Useful Samples

      提出的 semi-supervised learning 这个概念比较有趣。给数据集每个 sample 打分或许对 interpretability 有点帮助吧。。。。

  26. Oct 2018
  27. May 2018
  28. Aug 2016
    1. Upcoming/Current Projects Papers, Posters & Presentations Recognition & Participation Teaching Coursework History Recent Software Projects Contact

      This is a sample public annotation that I created.

  29. Jun 2015
  30. Feb 2014
    1. The cases on the subject are collected in a footnote to Somerset Bank v. Edmund, 10 Am. & Eng. Ann. Cas. 726; 76 Ohio St. Rep. 396, the head-note to which reads: "Public policy and sound morals alike forbid that a public officer should demand or receive for services performed by him in the discharge of official duty any other or further remuneration or reward than that prescribed or allowed by law." This rule of public policy has been relaxed only in those instances where the legislature for sufficient public reason has seen fit by statute to extend the stimulus of a reward to the public without distinction, as in the case of United States v. Matthews, 173 U.S. 381, where the attorney-general, under an act for "the detection and prosecution of crimes against the United States," made a public offer of reward sufficiently liberal and generic to comprehend the services of a federal deputy marshal. Exceptions of that character upon familiar principles serve to emphasize the correctness of the rule, as one based upon sound public policy.

      1) A public officer cannot demand or receive remuneration or a reward for carrying out the duty of his job as a matter of public policy and morality

      2) However, it is not against public policy for a police officer to receive a reward in performance of his legal duty if the legislature passes a statute giving the reward to the public at large in furtherance of some public policy - such as preventing treason against the US.

    2. MINTURN, J. The plaintiff occupied the position of a special police officer, in Atlantic City, and incidentally was identified with the work of the prosecutor of the pleas of the county. He possessed knowledge concerning the theft of certain diamonds and jewelry from the possession of the defendant, who had advertised a reward for the recovery of the property. In this situation he claims to have entered into a verbal contract with defendant, whereby she agreed to pay him $500 if he could procure for her the names and addresses of the thieves. As a result of his meditation with the police authorities the diamonds and jewelry were recovered, and plaintiff brought this suit to recover the promised reward.
      • Plaintiff makes a verbal contract with defendant. In return for $500, plaintiff will find defendant's stolen jewels.
      • Plaintiff had knowledge of whereabouts of jewels at contract formation.
      • Plaintiff is a special police officer and has dealings with prosecutor's office.
      • Defendant published advertisement for reward.
      • Plaintiff finds stolen goods and arranges return.
    3. The judgment below for that reason must be reversed.

      Court reverses decision of lower court in favor of the plaintiff since he was characterized as a public official.

    4. The testimony makes it manifest that he was a special police officer to some extent identified with the work of the prosecutor's office, and that position, upon well-settled grounds of public policy, required him to assist, at least, in the prosecution of offenders against the law. The services he rendered, in this instance, must be presumed to have been rendered in pursuance of that public duty, and for its performance he was not entitled to receive a special quid pro quo.
      • Court finds sufficient evidence to characterize this fellow as a public official.

      • His interaction with the prosecutor's office weighed in as a factor in suggesting he had a legal duty.

      • Since he is characterized within the rule as a public official, he cannot, as a matter of law, receive a reward for the performance of his duties.

    5. The District Court, sitting without a jury, awarded plaintiff a judgment for the amount of the reward, and hence this appeal.
      • Cop sues for reward money.
      • District court awards money to the cop.
      • Defendant appeals.
    6. Various points are discussed in the briefs, but to us the dominant and conspicuous inquiry in the case is, was the plaintiff, during the period of this transaction, a public officer, charged with the enforcement of the law?
    7. STEPHEN GRAY, RESPONDENT, v. THERESA D. MARTINO, APPELLANT Supreme Court of New Jersey 91 N.J.L. 462; 103 A. 24 February 2, 1918, Decided

      Gray (cop) v. Martino (crime victim)

      type: respondent

      • role: cop
      • abbrev: Gray
      • name: Stephen Gray

      type: appellant

      • role: crime victim
      • abbrev: Martino
      • name: Theresa D. Martino