- Oct 2019
-
reg.clinicalgenome.org reg.clinicalgenome.org
-
allele id lookup result: https://reg.clinicalgenome.org/redmine/projects/registry/genboree_registry/by_caid?caid=CA346764646
-
-
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
-
developmental delay
Monarch lookup result: https://monarchinitiative.org/phenotype/HP:0001263
-
developmental delay
-
- Jul 2019
-
ask.audio ask.audio
-
Monitoring Latency (How Low Can You Go?)
-
- Mar 2019
-
sinedesign.co sinedesign.co
-
Today, most delay units are digital, but they often include controls to help them emulate the characteristics of the early tape units, including distortion and low-pass filtering in the delay path and pitch modulation to emulate the wow and flutter of a well-used tape transport.
While pure digital delay produces perfect echoes, an analogue emulation can be more musically useful, as each successive echo becomes less distinct, creating a sense of distance and perspective.
Hi-fi echoes tend to confuse the original sound, while the human hearing system seems better able to separate lo-fi echoes from the original clean sound.
-
- May 2016
-
science.sciencemag.org science.sciencemag.org
-
the median review time at journals has grown from 85 days to >150 days during the past decade (5)
This statement is a misunderstanding of Powell 2016, which states:
At Nature, the median review time has grown from 85 days to just above 150 days over the past decade, according to Himmelstein's analysis.
However,
the median review time — the time between submission and acceptance of a paper — has hovered at around 100 days for more than 30 years.
So while the median review time at Nature has gone from 85 to 150 days, this is not the case for all journals. See also the related Tweet.
-