52 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2019
    1. asic Sciences IC110 Engineering Mathematics Download Course Details IC111 Linear Algebra Download Course Details IC121 Mechanics of Particles and Waves Download Course Details IC130 Applied Chemistry for Engineers Download Course Details IC130P Chemistry Practicum

      this page is not required it is already covered in http://iitmandi.ac.in/academics/disciplinewise.php

  2. Apr 2019
  3. Aug 2018
  4. Dec 2017
  5. Nov 2017
  6. May 2017
  7. Mar 2017
    1. No one city has gotten it right so far. Many, however, have gotten it wrong, falling for the promises of greater efficiency delivered by startups, of greater creativity delivered by hackathons, and of greater transparency delivered by open government initiatives that, instead of helping to eliminate the corrupt parts of the public sector, provided the rationale for shrinking those that worked rather well. Silicon Valley and the Big Four consulting firms that, between themselves, dominate the smart city market, do not exercise their hegemony effortlessly; it takes a lot of hard work –which manifests itself in endless conferences and expos, commissioned think-tank reports, and regular think pieces –to frame the smart city issue as an inevitable, self-evident, and progressive project. It’s a world where venture capitalists have their own podcasts, write books on political themes, and fund philosophers (and occasional lawsuits). In a world like this, defending the theme of technological sovereignty would require not just practical interventions in the inner workings of our cities but also constant ideological and intellectual work in order to oppose the constant reframing of issues along the lines favorable to big business. Given the high turnover of concepts and narratives supplied to us by Silicon Valley and its resident intellectuals –it’s not just smart city, but also the sharing economy, big data, the internet of things, algorithmic regulation, Web 2.0 –the very idea of technological sovereignty is likely to be soon twisted into something it should not be.

      Die beiden Absätze würde ich einfach wegstreichen.

    2. Despite the incessant celebration of citiesas the most important actors of the global system, with celebrity mayors rising to rulethe world and soon, perhaps, the universe, the reality lookssomewhat different.

      Mal wirklich eine Kürzungsoption.

  8. Nov 2016
    1. .

      delete period

    2. (More than once per week leakage.)

      suggest to remove

    3. (EBRT or Brachytherapy and moderate/big problem with urinary function)

      suggest to remove

    4. (2 or more pads per day or Moderate/Big problem dripping or leaking urine)

      suggest to remove

    5. These Urinary recommendations are tailored for the following:

      This type of callout/listing of tailoring variables is not common to me, but I do kind of like it. However, I'd remove all of the redundant (stuff in parentheses).

    6. These General recommendations are tailored for the following:For all patients

      I'd remove this block/text entirely. Mostly because we tell participants it's tailored to them and this says everyone. So even if it were applicable to all men dealing with prostate cancer, it in essence is still 'tailored'. so there is no risk of deception in tailoring. I'd delete to avoid confusion or disillusionment.

    7. (For all patients)

      Remove

  9. Aug 2016
    1. . This is seen in a different way
    2. in detail in drafted simplified images
    3. s
    4. a
    5. for example
    6. alpha
    7. For the analysis,the technical replicates were assumed to be biological replicates
    8. between methylated und unmethylated CpGs
    9. diverse conversion of cytosines
    10. Whereupon
    11. The ratio 260nm/280nm was used to assess the purity of the DNA.

      redundant

    12. Wavy bumps indicatethe activity (read depth, the number of reads).
    13. (activity is defined by the expression levels of the transcripts)
    14. s
    15. , which means that the
    16. higher CGI promoter activity and
    17. (red line)
    18. in theRNA-seq dataplot
    19. out of 632
    20. single
    21. and forall 30 mouse tissues
    22. Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated to compare the expression level of the intragenic promoter (CGI) or transcriptionalactivity initiating at the intragenic CGI and the ratio upstream/across, which means transcription upstream and splicing across the CGI. For the negative control sample dataset Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated as well with simulated intragenic promoters. The cut-off was set close to the maximum correlation of the negative control dataset and defined at 0.5.

      redundant

    23. and defined
    24. For the negative control sample dataset,Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated alongside simulated intragenic promoters.
    25. ‘Host gene upstream of the intragenic promoter’(Upstream) defined as fragment numbers measured from the TSS until the beginning of the CGI and ‘Gene through the intragenic promoter’(Across), defined as exonic fragmentsoverlapping with the host gene;

      redundant

    26. Work form
    27. has recently

      not so recent

    28. , notwithstanding of gene expression
    29. and occurs if an intron is retained,which normally would be removed

      redundant

    30. the
    31. -specific

    Tags

    Annotators