| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 990 | 回復(fù): 6 | |||
| 【懸賞金幣】回答本帖問(wèn)題,作者wukehzau將贈(zèng)送您 20 個(gè)金幣 | |||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿(mǎn)足指定條件的回帖,點(diǎn)擊這里查看本話(huà)題的所有回帖 | |||
wukehzau新蟲(chóng) (正式寫(xiě)手)
|
[求助]
數(shù)據(jù)有效數(shù)字的問(wèn)題 已有1人參與
|
||
|
Not reporting values with an experimental error is acceptable as long as the accuracy of an observable is reflected through its significant figures. I am quite skeptical that values are reported with too many significant figures throughout the paper. For instance lines 237 - 241. Do the wt percentages reported with 4 significant figures (error in the range of 0.005%) really reflect the experimental error? If this is not the case all reported values should be revised and reported with correct sig. figs. 求助各位大神,這該如何修改? |
新蟲(chóng) (正式寫(xiě)手)
|
我那兩個(gè)產(chǎn)率的誤差也確實(shí)不大,一個(gè)是0.26%,一個(gè)是0.36%,數(shù)據(jù)絕對(duì)是真實(shí)有效的,不知道該咋回復(fù)這條審稿意見(jiàn)了 ![]() 發(fā)自小木蟲(chóng)IOS客戶(hù)端 |
至尊木蟲(chóng) (職業(yè)作家)
新蟲(chóng) (正式寫(xiě)手)
|
我文中給的是物質(zhì)產(chǎn)率的平均值(44.96wt.%,27.19wt.%),我沒(méi)弄明白審稿人那個(gè)0.005%是咋算出來(lái)的 ![]() 發(fā)自小木蟲(chóng)IOS客戶(hù)端 |
至尊木蟲(chóng) (職業(yè)作家)
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|