Table 2
A comparison of the evidence for density models L, G, and S.
| L | G | S | |
|
|
|||
| >0 | 44% | 43% | 13% |
| >2 | 25% | 32% | 4% |
| >6 | 8% | 12% | 0% |
| >10 | 5% | 5% | 0% |
| ∑ Pi | 101.5 | 99.4 | 32.1 |
Notes. Rows 1–4: Percentages of coronal loop intensity profiles falling into four evidence thresholds for each density model. For a loop to be counted for a given model and threshold its Bayes factor from comparison to both other models, Kij and Kik, must be greater than that threshold. Row 5: summed probability values (Pi) for each density model, showing how the evidence is distributed between the three models for our 233 analysed loops.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.