✦ LIBER ✦

Comparison of two modeling methods for induction machine study: application to diagnosis

✍ Scribed by Delmotte‐Delforge, C.; Hénao, H.; Ekwe, G.; Brochet, P.; Capolino, G‐A.

Book ID: 118241228
Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Year: 2003
Tongue: English
Weight: 616 KB
Volume: 22
Category: Article
ISSN: 0332-1649
DOI: 10.1108/03321640310482887

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES

Comparison of two different PCR detectio

Comparison of two different PCR detection methods. Application to the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis

✍ J. C. RODRIGUEZ; E. FUENTES; G. ROYO 📂 Article 📅 1997 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 460 KB

Application and comparison of two models

Application and comparison of two models to study effects of calcium sources in sheep

✍ R.S. Dias; E. Kebreab; D.M.S.S. Vitti; A.P. Roque; J. France 📂 Article 📅 2008 🏛 Elsevier Science 🌐 English ⚖ 317 KB

Development of methods to enhance extrin

Development of methods to enhance extrinsic tooth discoloration for comparison of toothpastes : 2. Two-product clinical study

✍ H. Pontefract; M. Courtney; S. Smith; R. G. Newcombe; M. Addy 📂 Article 📅 2004 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 78 KB

An Evaluation of Fitting Methods for the

An Evaluation of Fitting Methods for the Sum of Two Hyperbolas: Application to Uptake Studies

✍ Donald J. W. BURNS; Stephen A. TUCKER 📂 Article 📅 1977 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 736 KB

Comparison of Two Methods for Preparing

Comparison of Two Methods for Preparing Mitochondria from Tomato Leaves to Study the Ascorbate-Glutathione Cycle Activity

✍ E. Kuźniak; M. Skłodowska 📂 Article 📅 2004 🏛 Springer Netherlands 🌐 English ⚖ 109 KB

Critical comparison of two methods for t

Critical comparison of two methods for the determination of nanomechanical properties of a material: Application to synthetic and natural biomaterials

✍ Gladius Lewis; Jie Xu; Nicholas Dunne; Catherine Daly; John Orr 📂 Article 📅 2006 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 157 KB 👁 1 views

## Abstract Two methods used for determining the elastic modulus (E) and hardness (H) of a material—the original version of the well‐known Oliver‐Pharr Method, OOPM, and a variant of it called the Modified Slopes Method, MSM—were critically compared. The nanoindentation test results, of indenter lo