Accepted Manuscript Sample Clauses

Accepted Manuscript. (i) immediately on acceptance: sharing of the Accepted Manuscript by an author: • via the author’s non-commercial personal homepage or blog • via the author’s research institute or institutional repository for Internal Institutional Use or as part of an invitation-only research collaboration work-group • directly by providing copies to the author’s students or to research collaborators for their personal use • for private scholarly sharing as part of an invitation-only work group on commercial sites with which the publisher has a hosting agreement
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (9)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Accepted Manuscript. 3 or not-for-profit sectors. ACCEP XXX XXXXX CRIP T 4 5 Conflict of Interest: Two authors (X,X) have a material interest in the xXXX® telerehabilitation system. 6 They have not been directly involved in the collection or analysis of data in this study.
Sample 1
Accepted Manuscript. Authors’ notes This research has been partially supported by Grants CONSOLIDER-INGENIO2010 CSD2008-00048 and PSI2012-31448 from the Spanish Government and ERC-2011- ADG-295362 grant from the European Research Council. S.M was supported by a Gipuzkoako Foru Aldundia Fellowship. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, BasqueCenter on Cognition, Brain and Language, Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx 00, 0000, Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxx (email: x.xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xx).
Sample 1
Accepted Manuscript. Figure Captions
Sample 1
Accepted Manuscript. In the case of the mediation analyses, both models (the mediator model and the response model) were tested for the three clusters (left inferior frontal, left temporal and precuneus-cuneus). These analyses allow us to identify the potential effect of the task difficulty over the causal pathway between the treatment [critical manipulation: Mismatch vs. Match in Determiner-Noun pairs and Mismatch vs. Match in Subject-Verb pairs] and the brain response [interaction effect at the neural response level]. The mediator model is represented by the semi-circle in the causal diagram (Figure 2S), where the causal effect of the treatment on the outcome is transmitted through an intermediate variable or a mediator [behavioural measures: RT or error rates]. The response model is represented by the triangle, where the behavioural measures and the critical manipulation act as predictors of the brain response. The effects of RT and error rates as mediator variables were estimated separately, represented by the black and the grey lines respectively. However, similar results emerged for the two analyses. The causal response effect between the treatment and the brain response outcome was significant for the three clusters. In contrast, no significant direct effect was found between the behavioural measures and the brain response outcome. Similarly, for the three clusters, the mediator model effects considering the RT as a mediator variable between treatment and neural response were not significant (p > 0.05). These results suggest that the interaction effect between the Type of Word Pair and the Agreement Pattern found at the neural level are not biased by the task difficulty.
Sample 1
Accepted Manuscript. It could therefore be that the reading of a number mismatch between a determiner and a noun blocks the building of a basic syntactic unit, impeding further analytical steps such as conceptual and lexical integration of the two words (cf. Xxxxxx and Carreiras, 2005). In contrast, the more complex representation underlying subject-verb pairs could facilitate the establishment of a relation between the two words even in the presence of mismatching number values, since the processing system would be still able to determine that the ill-formed pair refers to a dancing event. From a neuro-anatomical perspective, the qualitative differences between the two dependencies predicted by these theoretical accounts can emerge in qualitative and/or quantitative terms. In the former case, difference should be reflected in the engagement of distinct neural networks that support the two types of agreement, while in the latter, greater or lesser neural responses within the same network would be found. In addition, differences between the two patterns (nominal and subject-verb agreement) may also arise from the different interpretive outcomes that the syntactic integration of these two types of structures produces. While in the former case interpretation leads to associating a linguistic stimulus (“El anillo”) to a referent in the external world (a circle-shaped object), interpretation of a subject-verb agreement relation (“Él baila”) implies building a richer semantic representation that encompasses not only the identification of entities in the external world, but also their thematic and discourse roles in the dancing event that the agreement relation describes. This could therefore lead to differential patterns of activation that qualitatively and/or quantitatively differ across nominal and subject-verb agreement in areas that have been associated with semantic integration and conceptual processing, such as the anterior temporal cortex and/or the angular gyrus (Binder and Xxxxx, 2011; Binder et al., 2009; Bornkessel-Schlesewsky and Schlesewsky, 2013; Xxx et al., 2008; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2014). In parallel to these language-specific operations, an amodal conflict-monitoring system operates, whose function is to prevent behavioral mistakes by monitoring the presence of conflicting cues (for a discussion of this topic see 2011; 2010; van de Meerendonk et al., 2009). Previous findings point to the anterior cingulate cortex (Xxxxxx and xxx Xxxx, 2007; Xxxxxx et al., 2007; 2011; 2...
Sample 1
Accepted Manuscript. The manuscript of the Article that has been accepted for publication and which typically includes author-incorporated changes suggested during submission, peer review, and editor-author communications. The Accepted Manuscript should not be added to or enhanced in any way to appear more like, or to substitute for, the Published Journal Article. To check the embargo period for the journal, go to xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx/about/policies-and-standards/sharing#3-accepted-manuscript.The publisher has agreements with certain funding agencies that may permit shorter embargo periods and/or different sharing guidelines. To learn more about the publisher's policies and agreements with such agencies or institutions go to xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxx.xxx/open-access/agreements. The definitive final record of published research that appears or will appear in the journal and embodies all value-adding publisher activities, including peer review co-ordination, copy-editing, formatting, (if relevant) pagination, and online enrichment.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Accepted Manuscript for the response times. In the following paragraphs we discuss how these main effects and interactions resulting from the current design fit with previous evidence concerning agreement processing, emphasizing the three different circuits where the interactions emerged. Conflict-monitoring system Firstly, a bilateral widespread network results from the contrast Number Match > Number Mismatch, including regions such as the anterior and middle cingulate cortex, the precuneus-cuneus, the dorsal part of the middle frontal gyrus and the angular gyrus. It is not surprising that different kinds of agreement dependency share this pattern of response. The increases in the activation of the dorsal part of the middle frontal gyrus often covaries with significant increases in the de-activation patterns of the anterior cingulate cortex (the hub of the conflict monitoring system, Xxxxxx and xxx Xxxx, 2007; Xxxxxx et al., 2007) and the angular gyrus (the sub-region associated with the default mode network, (see Seghier et al., 2012 for a revision of this topic). The coupling between these regions probably reflects the engagement of conflict monitoring mechanisms and the subsequent re-analysis and repair processes triggered by the grammatical error detection, a common process taking place for both types of dependencies. The involvement of this monitoring system in the processing of mismatches7 is consistent with previous evidence (Bambini et al., 2011; Xxxxx et al., 2004; Xxxxxxxxx et al., 2003; Xxxxxxxxx et al., 2008; Xxxxx et al., 2008; Ni et al., 2000; Xxxxxx et al., 2005; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2014; 2011; 2010; xxx xx Xxxxxxxxxx xx xx., 0000; Ye and Zhou, 2009) and may subserve the generation of the P600 effect typically reported for this type of manipulations (Xxxx and Xxxxxxxx, 2006; Xxxxxxx et al., 2011b; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2011; Xxxxx-Xxxxxxx and Carreiras, 2007). In line with this hypothesis, previous evidence has demonstrated the contribution of the anterior cingulate cortex in the generation of this late positive response (Du et al., 2013; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2010). This amodal monitoring system, probably working in parallel to the language-specific machinery, seems to be enhanced whenever an inconsistency is detected, independently of its nature, in order to prevent behavioural mistakes. The involvement of this monitoring system during the processing of these two types of dependencies is also 7 These regions exhibited negative responses patterns (de-activation) compared ...
Sample 1

Related to Accepted Manuscript

  • ONLINE PUBLIC AUCTION PROCESS 2.1. E-Bidders may browse through the PAH Website and select the properties they wish to bid online.

  • Delivery and Acceptance of the Manuscript The Author shall deliver the Contribution to the Editor (or, if requested by the Publisher, to the Publisher) on or before Delivery Date (the “Delivery Date”) electronically in the Publisher's standard requested format or in such other form as may be agreed in writing with the Publisher. The Author shall retain a duplicate copy of the Contribution. The Contribution shall be in a form acceptable to the Publisher (acting reasonably) and in line with the instructions contained in the Publisher’s guidelines as provided to the Author by the Publisher. The Author shall provide at the same time, or earlier if the Publisher reasonably requests, any editorial, publicity or other information (and in such form or format) reasonably required by the Publisher. The Publisher may exercise such additional quality control of the manuscript as it may decide at its sole discretion including through the use of plagiarism checking systems and/or peer review by internal or external reviewers of its choice. If the Publisher decides at its sole discretion that the final manuscript does not conform in quality, content, structure, level or form to the stated requirements of the Publisher, the Publisher shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of this Clause. The Author must inform the Publisher at the latest on the Delivery Date if the sequence of the naming of any co-authors entering into this Agreement shall be changed. If there are any changes in the authorship (e.g. a co-author joining or leaving), then the Publisher must be notified by the Author in writing immediately and the Parties will amend this Agreement accordingly. The Publisher shall have no obligation to consider publication under this Agreement in the absence of such agreed amendment. If the Author fails to deliver the Contribution in accordance with the provisions of this Clause above by the Delivery Date (or within any extension period given by the Publisher at its sole discretion) or if the Author (or any co-author) dies or becomes incapacitated or otherwise incapable of performing the Author’s obligations under this Agreement, the Publisher shall be entitled to either: (a) elect to continue to perform this Agreement in accordance with its terms and the Publisher may commission an appropriate and competent person (who, in the case of co-authors having entered into this Agreement, may be a co-author) to complete the Contribution; or (b) terminate this Agreement with immediate effect by written notice to the Author or the Author's successors, in which case all rights granted by the Author to the Publisher under this Agreement shall revert to the Author/Author's successors (subject to the provisions of the Clause "Termination"). The Author agrees, at the request of the Publisher, to execute all documents and do all things reasonably required by the Publisher in order to confer to the Publisher all rights intended to be granted under this Agreement. The Author warrants that the Contribution is original except for any excerpts from other works including pre-published illustrations, tables, animations, text quotations, photographs, diagrams, graphs or maps, and whether reproduced from print or electronic or other sources ("Third Party Material") and that any such Third Party Material is in the public domain (or otherwise unprotected by copyright/other rights) or has been included with written permission from or on behalf of the rights holder (and if requested in a form prescribed or approved by the Publisher) at the Author's expense unless otherwise agreed in writing, or is otherwise used in accordance with applicable law. On request from the Publisher, the Author shall in writing indicate the precise sources of these excerpts and their location in the manuscript. The Author shall also retain the written permissions and make them available to the Publisher on request.

  • Notice of Technological Change (a) For the purpose of technological change, the Employer agrees to provide the Union with as much notice as possible, but in any event not less than sixty (60) days notice of a technological change.

  • Publication Notice Similarly, the Settlement Administrator will cause the Publication Notice to be published in accordance with the Media Plan attached as part of Exhibit B. The Parties agree that the Publication Notice provides to the Settlement Class and Settlement Class Members information sufficient to inform them of: the essential terms of the Settlement; appropriate means for obtaining additional information regarding the Settlement and the Action; and, appropriate information about the procedure for objecting or opting-out from the Settlement, if they should wish to do so. Because the Media Plan is determined to be the best notice practicable under the circumstances and satisfies due process, the Parties will request the Court to approve the Media Plan in the Preliminary Approval Order.

  • AUTHORITY PUBLICATIONS 3.1 The Authority will periodically update and revise marketing materials. The Supplier shall supply current information for inclusion in such marketing materials when required by the Authority.

  • New Application for Licensure Any time after the three-month period has lapsed from the Effective Date of this Agreement and Respondent has paid the Administrative Penalty set forth in Section III, Paragraph 1 of this Order, Respondent may apply for a new mortgage loan originator license or, as applicable, petition for the reinstatement of an MLO Activity Endorsement in any or all of the Participating States with the understanding that each State Mortgage Regulator reserves the rights to fully investigate such application for licensure or petition for reinstatement of an MLO Activity Endorsement and may either approve or deny such application or petition pursuant to the normal process for such licensing or endorsement investigations. No license application or petition described in this paragraph will be denied solely based on the facts, circumstances, or consensual resolution provided for in this Agreement. Respondent further agrees that Respondent must satisfy the Administrative Penalty provision prior to submitting an application for a new mortgage loan originator license or, as applicable, petition for the reinstatement of an MLO Activity Endorsement.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!