it contains conclusions not explained by the evidence given
The original conditions may not have been conducent to good results, for example, scientists testing heat transfer and didn't use a completely closed environment in their experiment may have the conditions changed by other scientists who are peer-reviewing the experiment. They may also change it to see how the change alters the results
A Conclusion is the opinion formed after reviewing the evidence of your experiment. Conclusion also means the results of your hypothesis. ex: My hypothesis is most people drive a mini van than a jeep. My conclusion is most people drive a jeep than a mini van. so it's kind of the answer to your hypothesis but not all the way through though.
by reviewing whats is already known
Is the information your reviewing provided or your own? Does the appearance support the hypothesis or the evidence? Ever heard of devils advocat?
Through peer review
it contains conclusions not explained by the evidence given
The original conditions may not have been conducent to good results, for example, scientists testing heat transfer and didn't use a completely closed environment in their experiment may have the conditions changed by other scientists who are peer-reviewing the experiment. They may also change it to see how the change alters the results
A Conclusion is the opinion formed after reviewing the evidence of your experiment. Conclusion also means the results of your hypothesis. ex: My hypothesis is most people drive a mini van than a jeep. My conclusion is most people drive a jeep than a mini van. so it's kind of the answer to your hypothesis but not all the way through though.
by reviewing whats is already known
The general term for this is not "grading" but "peer review."
A conclusion is typically reached by reviewing all the evidence, facts, and arguments presented during an investigation or discussion. It involves synthesizing this information to form a final decision or opinion based on the available data. It is important to consider all perspectives and weigh the relevant factors before drawing a conclusion.
Is the information your reviewing provided or your own? Does the appearance support the hypothesis or the evidence? Ever heard of devils advocat?
When reviewing experimental data, scientists look for results that either support or disprove their theories. Additionally, they may seek patterns of results that either match previous results or that suggest another reason for the results.
Through peer review
it is basically called as reviewing the paper from the peer members so called for checking the originality ,impact,etc. -datta v
it is basically called as reviewing the paper from the peer members so called for checking the originality ,impact,etc. -datta v
It is possible. John Butterworth, a member of the ATLAS group at CERN confirms that they are reviewing the results of tests conducted in April 2011, and that the rumors are based on unofficial, unconfirmed results, but that "scientific process requires prudence before making a conclusion". For more information, please see the Related Link below. Scroll down towards the end of the section in the linked article.