№ files_lp_4_process_1_47483
File format: docx
Character count: 14547
File size: 35 KB
The document describes the methods and assessments used in a study on body composition, metabolic rates, and physical activity levels of healthy individuals, including trials involving DEXA scans, metabolic tests, and graded exercise tests.
Year:
2013
Region / city:
Not specified
Topic:
Physical activity, Body composition, Metabolic rate
Document type:
Research study
Organization / institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Researchers, Health professionals
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Year:
2023
Region / City:
New Zealand
Theme:
Functional numeracy skills assessment
Document Type:
Assessment guidelines
Organization / Institution:
New Zealand Qualifications Authority
Author:
New Zealand Qualifications Authority
Target Audience:
Learners (ākonga)
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Date of Approval:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
English language learning
Document type:
Educational plan
Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Primary school children
Period of use:
Not specified
Date of approval:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
202x
Region / City:
Not specified
Theme:
Project Management
Document Type:
Template
Organization:
18F
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Internal team and partner agency
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
Data replication, Research methodology
Document type:
Guidelines
Organization / Institution:
Various academic journals
Author:
Various authors
Target audience:
Researchers, Academics
Period of validity:
Indefinite
Approval date:
2023
Date of modifications:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
International
Subject:
Fisheries data, Tuna species, ICCAT
Document Type:
Technical Documentation
Organization:
ICCAT Secretariat
Author:
ICCAT Secretariat
Target Audience:
Researchers, Fisheries experts, ICCAT members
Period of validity:
1950-2021
Approval Date:
2023-01-25
Modification Date:
2022
Description:
The document provides a detailed description of the publicly available CATDIS files on the ICCAT website, their structure, content, and formats, covering tuna catch data from 1950 to 2021.
Year:
2014
Region / City:
Alabama
Topic:
GIS Data, Modeling
Document Type:
Instruction Manual
Organization / Institution:
US Geological Survey
Author:
Unknown
Target Audience:
Researchers, GIS Analysts
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2010
Country:
United States
Subject:
Census data files and technical specifications
Document type:
Technical documentation
Issuing body:
U.S. Census Bureau
Data product:
2010 Census Advance Group Quarters Summary File
Distribution method:
FTP
File formats:
ASCII flat files, comma-delimited data, ZIP archive
Operating systems referenced:
Windows, Linux
Related table:
Table P42. Group Quarters Population by Group Quarters Type
Related documentation:
Technical Documentation, Chapters 2 and 4
Description of data structure:
Segmented data files with geographic header and File01 linked by LOGRECNO
Year:
2021
Region / City:
UK
Topic:
Trade-Based Money Laundering (TBML)
Document Type:
Research Data
Institution / Organization:
Self-funded
Author:
Mariola Marzouk
Target Audience:
Academic researchers, financial professionals, law enforcement, policymakers
Duration:
April 2020 - August 2020
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2022
Region / city:
United States
Topic:
Noise Exposure Mapping
Document Type:
README
Institution:
Seto and Huang, 2023
Target Audience:
Researchers, GIS Analysts
Period of validity:
2016-2020
Date of approval:
2022-02-01
Date of changes:
Not specified
Description:
A detailed technical document on noise exposure mapping for different states in the U.S., including data variables and instructions for using the data in R and GIS software.
File name:
README
Contact person:
Justin Yarrington
Email:
[email protected]
Institution:
Carbon Neutral Energy Systems, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA
Additional organization:
BuzzMac International, LLC, Portland, ME
Time period of data collection:
2019-08-16 to 2020-07-24
Date dataset last modified:
2020-09-23
Data file formats:
Excel spreadsheet (.xlsx), text file (.txt)
Primary data file:
HighTemperatureFlowData_CP3060.xlsx
Supplementary file:
liggghtsinputscript.txt
Software used:
MATLAB, NI LabVIEW, SolidWorks, LIGGGHTS
Environmental conditions:
Standard conditions with temperatures from 23 °C to 800 °C
Measured parameters:
Particle size and shape, elastic modulus, shear modulus, coefficient of restitution, coefficient of static sliding friction, coefficient of static rolling friction
Material studied:
Carbobead CP
Measurement uncertainties:
Particle size and shape ±6.86 μm; Elastic and shear modulus ±0.0822 GPa; Coefficient of static sliding friction ±0.0773; Coefficient of static rolling friction ±0.0827; Coefficient of restitution ±0.0317
Experimental equipment:
Impulse tool, transducer, K-type thermocouples, furnace (MTI Corporation KSL1200)
Methodological reference:
Detailed methodologies described in published manuscript
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Atlanta, GA
Theme:
Rheology, Material Science
Document Type:
Report
Organization / Institution:
Georgia Tech
Author:
Bo Rider
Target Audience:
Researchers in material science, rheology, and civil engineering
Period of Validity:
September 2025
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
September 2025
File Information:
XLSX, DOCX
Software:
Unmodified raw data presented
Data Source:
Experimental data collected by Bo Rider
Uncertainty, Precision, and Accuracy:
NA
Environmental Conditions:
Indoor, 25°C
Standards:
Calibrated Anton-Paar MCR102 rheometer
Quality Assurance:
Evaporation control applied
Description:
Supplementary dataset to final MS report, providing experimental rheological data and parameters for concrete mixtures
Year:
2025
Institution:
University of Pennsylvania
Authors:
Dominic Ruggiero, Eric Roberts
Document Type:
Technical report
Subject:
Medicare Advantage data reliability
Target Audience:
Researchers and analysts working with MA data
Data Scope:
Single-year assessment using 100% MBSF MA record file and 20% random sample of encounter files
Files Included:
SAS code files, Excel spreadsheets, CSV and DTA datasets, methods documentation
Update History:
Last updated 11-26-2025
Method Comparison:
Includes comparison with existing MA data reliability assessment tools
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
Year:
2022
Event:
3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #118
Location:
Online
Topic:
Coarse UE location information format and reporting mechanism
Document type:
Meeting report / technical discussion
Organization:
3GPP
Author:
Thales
Agenda item:
6.10.1.1
Deadline for feedback:
2022-05-19 08:00 UTC
Deadline for rapporteur summary:
2022-05-19 10:00 UTC
Proposals for agreement by session chair:
2022-05-19 20:00 UTC
Year:
2020
Region / city:
Johns Hopkins University
Topic:
Coronavirus, Medical Research, Virus Characteristics
Document type:
Informational Article
Organization / institution:
Johns Hopkins University
Author:
Irene Ken
Target audience:
General Public, Researchers
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Date of approval:
4/3/2020
Date of changes:
N/A
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Eastern
Theme:
Conference, Faculty Information
Document Type:
Conference Guide
Organization / Institution:
Write His Answer Ministries
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Faculty
Effective Date:
July 25, 2025
Date of Approval:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Context:
A guide for faculty members attending the Write His Answer 2025 conference, including details on sign-in procedures, tech checks, conference schedule, and waiver agreement.
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Not specified
Topic:
Hosted Voice Services
Document Type:
User guide
Organization / Institution:
Clearspan
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
New Administrators and Users of Hosted Voice Services
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
N/A
Region / city:
N/A
Topic:
Power system, wind energy, inverter systems
Document type:
Technical specification
Organization:
N/A
Author:
N/A
Target audience:
Engineers, power system designers
Effective period:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Date of amendments:
N/A
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
Software Requirements Specification
Document Type:
Guide
Organization:
SoftwareTestingHelp
Author:
SoftwareTestingHelp
Target Audience:
ESS-User, Non-specialists
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified