These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8675846)

  • 1. Adaptive psychophysical procedures and imbalance in the psychometric function.
    Saberi K; Green DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Jul; 100(1):528-36. PubMed ID: 8675846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Stimulus selection in adaptive psychophysical procedures.
    Green DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Jun; 87(6):2662-74. PubMed ID: 2373801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A maximum-likelihood method for estimating thresholds in a yes-no task.
    Green DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1993 Apr; 93(4 Pt 1):2096-105. PubMed ID: 8473622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests.
    Brand T; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Jun; 111(6):2801-10. PubMed ID: 12083215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Estimation of psychometric functions from adaptive tracking procedures.
    Leek MR; Hanna TE; Marshall L
    Percept Psychophys; 1992 Mar; 51(3):247-56. PubMed ID: 1561050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparing adaptive procedures for estimating the psychometric function for an auditory gap detection task.
    Shen Y
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2013 May; 75(4):771-80. PubMed ID: 23417238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation of maximum-likelihood estimators in nonintensive auditory psychophysics.
    Saberi K; Green DM
    Percept Psychophys; 1997 Aug; 59(6):867-76. PubMed ID: 9270361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bayesian adaptive estimation of psychometric slope and threshold.
    Kontsevich LL; Tyler CW
    Vision Res; 1999 Aug; 39(16):2729-37. PubMed ID: 10492833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Hybrid adaptive procedure for estimation of psychometric functions.
    Hall JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1981 Jun; 69(6):1763-9. PubMed ID: 7240589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Slope bias of psychometric functions derived from adaptive data.
    Kaernbach C
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Nov; 63(8):1389-98. PubMed ID: 11800464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Intensity discrimination as a function of stimulus level with electric stimulation.
    Nelson DA; Schmitz JL; Donaldson GS; Viemeister NF; Javel E
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Oct; 100(4 Pt 1):2393-414. PubMed ID: 8865646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bayesian adaptive estimation of threshold versus contrast external noise functions: the quick TvC method.
    Lesmes LA; Jeon ST; Lu ZL; Dosher BA
    Vision Res; 2006 Oct; 46(19):3160-76. PubMed ID: 16782167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Estimating parameters for psychometric functions using the four-point sampling method.
    Lam CF; Dubno JR; Ahlstrom JB; He NJ; Mills JH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1997 Dec; 102(6):3697-703. PubMed ID: 9407661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Measuring, estimating, and understanding the psychometric function: a commentary.
    Klein SA
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Nov; 63(8):1421-55. PubMed ID: 11800466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Experience with a yes-no single-interval maximum-likelihood procedure.
    Leek MR; Dubno JR; He N; Ahlstrom JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 May; 107(5 Pt 1):2674-84. PubMed ID: 10830389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation.
    King-Smith PE; Grigsby SS; Vingrys AJ; Benes SC; Supowit A
    Vision Res; 1994 Apr; 34(7):885-912. PubMed ID: 8160402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Order effects in two-alternative forced-choice tasks invalidate adaptive threshold estimates.
    García-Pérez MA; Alcalá-Quintana R
    Behav Res Methods; 2020 Oct; 52(5):2168-2187. PubMed ID: 32232736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Determination of optimal data placement for psychometric function estimation: a computer simulation.
    Lam CF; Dubno JR; Mills JH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Oct; 106(4 Pt 1):1969-76. PubMed ID: 10530021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Tracking of nociceptive thresholds using adaptive psychophysical methods.
    Doll RJ; Buitenweg JR; Meijer HG; Veltink PH
    Behav Res Methods; 2014 Mar; 46(1):55-66. PubMed ID: 23835651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Determining thresholds using adaptive procedures and psychometric fits: evaluating efficiency using theory, simulations, and human experiments.
    Karmali F; Chaudhuri SE; Yi Y; Merfeld DM
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Mar; 234(3):773-89. PubMed ID: 26645306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.