Levels of Agreement Sample Clauses

Levels of Agreement. Adjudicator agreement was computed in several ways. Overlap is the number of positive judgments in common divided by the total number of positive judgments. The statistics p+ and p- are the proportions of specific agreement on positives and negatives, respectively (Fleiss, 1981). The formulas for overlap and specific agreement are shown in Figure 3, based on a standard contingency table where cell a represents the number of agreements on positives, d the number of agreements on negatives, and b and c the number of disagreements. overlap = a / (a + b + c) p+ = 2a / (2a + b + c) p- = 2d / (2d + b + c) Figure 3: Agreement formulas. Figure 4 shows pairwise agreement between adjudicators, labeled A through D, and also includes the commonly used kappa metric (Fleiss, 1981). The lowest agreement is between adjudicators A and B, where kappa is 0.57. Figure 5 shows the base rates of acceptance. Recall that adjudication pools are designed to include many false matches in order to increase the likelihood that they contain all the true matches. Thus the low acceptance rates are expected. 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.14 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 A B C D Figure 5: Base rates of acceptance.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Levels of Agreement. Adjudicator agreement was computed in several ways. Overlap is the number of positive judgments in common divided by the total number of positive judgments. The 0.10 0.00 A B C D statistics p+ and p- are the proportions of specific agreement on positives and negatives, respectively (Fleiss, 1981). The formulas for overlap and specific agreement are shown in Figure 3, based on a standard contingency table where cell a represents the number of agreements on positives, d the number of agreements on negatives, and b and c the number of disagreements. overlap = a / (a + b + c) p+ = 2a / (2a + b + c) p- = 2d / (2d + b + c) Figure 3: Agreement formulas. Figure 4 shows pairwise agreement between adjudicators, labeled A through D, and also includes the commonly used kappa metric (Fleiss, 1981). The lowest agreement is between adjudicators A and B, where kappa is 0.57. Figure 5: Base rates of acceptance.
Sample 1

Related to Levels of Agreement

  • TERMS OF AGREEMENT In consideration of the mutual representations, warranties, covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:

  • SCOPE OF AGREEMENT Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to entitle Executive to continued employment with the Company or its Subsidiaries, and if Executive’s employment with the Company shall terminate prior to a Change in Control, Executive shall have no further rights under this Agreement (except as otherwise provided hereunder); provided, however, that any termination of Executive’s employment during the Termination Period shall be subject to all of the provisions of this Agreement.

  • Conditions of Agreement This is a tentative Agreement and shall be of no force and effect unless and until all of the following occur:

  • Status of Agreement A. This Agreement shall supersede any rules, regulations, policies, resolutions, or practices of the District which shall be contrary to or inconsistent with its terms.

  • PROCUREMENT OF AGREEMENT CONSULTANT represents and warrants that no person or selling agent has been employed or retained by CONSULTANT to solicit or secure this Agreement upon an agreement or upon an understanding for a commission, percentage, a brokerage fee, contingent fee or any other compensation. CONSULTANT further represents and warrants that no payment, gift or thing of value has been made, given or promised to obtain this or any other agreement between the parties. CONSULTANT makes such representations and warranties to induce the COUNTY to enter into this Agreement and the COUNTY relies upon such representations and warranties in the execution hereof. For a breach or violation of such representations or warranties, the COUNTY shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability, entitling the COUNTY to recover all monies paid hereunder and CONSULTANT shall not make claim for or be entitled to recover, any sum or sums otherwise due under this Agreement. This remedy, if effected, shall not constitute the sole remedy afforded the COUNTY for such falsity or breach, not shall it constitute a waiver of the COUNTY’s right to claim damages or otherwise refuse payment or to take any other action provided for by law or pursuant to this Agreement.

  • Review of Agreement Each party acknowledges that it has had time to review this agreement and, as desired, consult with counsel. In the interpretation of this agreement, no adverse presumption shall be made against any party on the basis that it has prepared, or participated in the preparation of, this agreement.

  • Scope and Limitations of Agreement 1.1 This Agreement shall be used for all Interconnection Requests submitted under the Small Generator Interconnection Procedures (SGIP) except for those submitted under the 10 kW Inverter Process contained in SGIP Attachment 5.

  • Contents of Agreement This Agreement, together with the other Transaction Documents, sets forth the entire understanding of the parties hereto with respect to the Transactions and supersedes all prior agreements or understandings among the parties regarding those matters.

  • Objectives of Agreement The objectives of this Agreement are to:

  • Modifications of Agreement This Agreement may be modified in writing only, signed by the parties in interest at the time of the modification.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.