Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Mean values, standard deviations and p-values at four different time points (baseline concentrations, immediately post apnea, 0.5 h and 4 h after apnea) for thrombocytes and mean platelet volume.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Mean values, standard deviations and p-values at four different time points (baseline concentrations, immediately post apnea, 0.5 h and 4 h after apnea) of white blood cell parameters.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Mean values, standard deviations and p-values at four different time points (baseline concentrations, immediately post apnea, 0.5 h and 4 h after apnea) of red blood cell parameters.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
In our everyday lives, we are required to make decisions based upon our statistical intuitions. Often, these involve the comparison of two groups, such as luxury versus family cars and their suitability. Research has shown that the mean difference affects judgements where two sets of data are compared, but the variability of the data has only a minor influence, if any at all. However, prior research has tended to present raw data as simple lists of values. Here, we investigated whether displaying data visually, in the form of parallel dot plots, would lead viewers to incorporate variability information. In Experiment 1, we asked a large sample of people to compare two fictional groups (children who drank ‘Brain Juice’ versus water) in a one-shot design, where only a single comparison was made. Our results confirmed that only the mean difference between the groups predicted subsequent judgements of how much they differed, in line with previous work using lists of numbers. In Experiment 2, we asked each participant to make multiple comparisons, with both the mean difference and the pooled standard deviation varying across data sets they were shown. Here, we found that both sources of information were correctly incorporated when making responses. Taken together, we suggest that increasing the salience of variability information, through manipulating this factor across items seen, encourages viewers to consider this in their judgements. Such findings may have useful applications for best practices when teaching difficult concepts like sampling variation.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Quantitative results for instance segmentation considering different ratio values, in terms of mIoU on the Youtube-VIS 2019 dataset.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
F-score results for Fg-Bg segmentation, considering different values of M, with and without post-processing.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
An ablation study to analyze the impact of proposed components on mIoU.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Mean values, standard deviations and p-values at four different time points (baseline concentrations, immediately post apnea, 0.5 h and 4 h after apnea) for thrombocytes and mean platelet volume.