We clarify the meaning of the term "unimolecular fragmentation". Apparently, there is some confusion relating to our use of the term "unimolecular fragmentation" in our previous paper [ 11. We must emphasize that we do not mean to imply that solvated daughter ions are
โฆ LIBER โฆ
Reply to comment of D. J. Seery and C. T. Bowman
โ Scribed by Richard L. Gay; Wen S. Young; Eldon L. Knuth
- Publisher
- Elsevier Science
- Year
- 1975
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 119 KB
- Volume
- 25
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0010-2180
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
๐ SIMILAR VOLUMES
Reply to comment of T.D. Mรคrk, โOn the p
โ
M.T. Coolbaugh; W.R. Peifer; J.F. Garvey
๐
Article
๐
1989
๐
Elsevier Science
๐
English
โ 111 KB
On the stoichiometric number of the hydr
On the stoichiometric number of the hydrogen electrode reaction: Reply to the comment of J. C. Reeve
โ
Tatsuo Matsushima; Michio Enyo
๐
Article
๐
1975
๐
Elsevier Science
๐
English
โ 309 KB
Reply to โComments on โAn improved model
โ
Xiumiao Zhang
๐
Article
๐
1991
๐
Elsevier Science
๐
English
โ 37 KB
Response to the comment of C. Jung and H
โ
Said M. Teleb; Sadeek A. Sadeek; El-Metwally Nour
๐
Article
๐
1994
๐
Elsevier Science
๐
English
โ 85 KB
Reply to โA comment on laboratory monito
โ
Donna D. Castellone; Elizabeth M. Van Cott
๐
Article
๐
2010
๐
John Wiley and Sons
๐
English
โ 553 KB
Jointness of growth determinants: Reply
โ
Gernot Doppelhofer; Melvyn Weeks
๐
Article
๐
2009
๐
John Wiley and Sons
๐
English
โ 55 KB
## Abstract This comment contrasts the jointness statistics proposed by Doppelhofer and Weeks (2009) with alternatives proposed by Strachan (2009) and Ley and Steel (2007). In contrast to the alternatives, our jointness statistic constitutes a formal test for dependence over the joint posterior dis