To evaluate the performance of the proposed SDQI, seven state-of-the-art methods BRISQUE [17], CPBD [19], JNB [11], LPC [14], S3 [26], BIQI [18], and MetricQ [30] have been compared objectively and subjectively.
Sample text:```While this method is known to be generally reliable, there are some questions about the representativeness of the data used [25].```
Sample intent: background
Sample text:```We use BLEU (up to 4-grams) (Papineni et al., 2002) as evaluation metric, which computes the precision of n-grams in generated summaries with gold-standard abstracts as the reference.```
Sample intent: background



Sample text:```This seems to be the main drawback of the current implementation in comparison to the method of Black Jepson (“refined” in Table 1).```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```The items are internally consistent and reproducible and the questionnaire may therefore be considered to have at least as favourable levels of reliability as clinical scores used to assess outcomes (Koran 1975).```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```Eight of the included studies examined the history of changes made to each registry record in order to compare published outcomes with the primary outcome as stated in the registry at either the time of study initiation or prior to completion of enrollment [7, 16, 20, 22, 24, 30, 31, 36].```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```The results for veridical recall replicated previous results in the literature (Bal-
lardini et al., 2008; McDermott & Watson, 2001), with the average recall of studied words increas-
ing monotonically as SOA increased.```
Sample intent: result
Sample text:```[19] showed that the system quality and information quality perceived by virtual community users significantly impacts their perceived benefits of participation in virtual communities.```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```The items are internally consistent and reproducible and the questionnaire may therefore be considered to have at least as favourable levels of reliability as clinical scores used to assess outcomes (Koran 1975).```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```We use BLEU (up to 4-grams) (Papineni et al., 2002) as evaluation metric, which computes the precision of n-grams in generated summaries with gold-standard abstracts as the reference.```
Sample intent: background



Sample text:```This seems to be the main drawback of the current implementation in comparison to the method of Black Jepson (“refined” in Table 1).```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```Over the last few years, many different local interest point detectors (like Harris3D [16], Cuboid [6], Hessian [35] or Dense sampling [33]) and many spatio-temporal descriptors (like HOG [17], HOG3D [14], HOF [17], Cuboid [6] or ESURF [35]) have been proposed.```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```Only one published paper (Enock et al. 2014) has examined this question, and thatwas in the context of anABM training study.```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```(orb), egl, and BicD (Costa et al., 2005; Mach and Lehmann, 1997; Suter and Steward, 1991).```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```13 indicates the comparison of the results of the mesh simplification method [2] after applying different mesh enhancement techniques.```
Sample intent: background



Sample text:```The results for veridical recall replicated previous results in the literature (Bal-
lardini et al., 2008; McDermott & Watson, 2001), with the average recall of studied words increas-
ing monotonically as SOA increased.```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```While this method is known to be generally reliable, there are some questions about the representativeness of the data used [25].```
Sample intent: background