REM

(redirected from comments)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Acronyms, Idioms, Encyclopedia.

REM

 
rapid eye movement; see sleep.

rem

 [rem]
roentgen equivalent man; the amount of any ionizing radiation which has the same biological effect as 1 rad of x-rays; 1 rem = 1 rad RBE (relative biological effectiveness).

REM

1. Acronym for rapid eye movements , under movement.

rem

Abbreviation for roentgen-equivalent-man.

REM

(rĕm)
n.
The twitching movements of the eye muscles and other physiological changes that occur during REM sleep.

rem

(rĕm)
n.
1. The amount of ionizing radiation required to produce the same biological effect as one rad of high-penetration x-rays.
2. A unit for measuring absorbed doses of radiation, equivalent to one roentgen of x-rays or gamma rays.

rem

Roentgen-equivalent in man Radiation physics The traditional unit of equivalent dose/unit of absorbed radiation, ± equal to a rad or 0.01 Seivert–Sv, the unit that replaces the rem–1 Sv = 100 rem. See Gray, Rad, Sievert.

REM

Abbreviation for rapid eye movements.

rem

Abbreviation for roentgen-equivalent-man.

REM

Acronym for rapid eye movements;reticular erythematous mucinosis

rem

Abbreviation for roentgen-equivalent-man.
References in periodicals archive ?
fraudulent, fake, and mass-solicited comments are increasing.
fraudulent comments submitted by people, bots, or other entities under
is considering fake comments in rulemaking processes or not acting to
Shortly after the DDoS attack, a (http://www.ibtimes.com/what-net-neutrality-fcc-asked-investigate-fake-comments-new-rules-2543803) wave of identical comments supporting the FCC's proposal began appearing.
A n (http://www.ibtimes.com/net-neutrality-debate-fcc-gets-22-million-comments-many-bots-2585441) umber of analyses that looked at the collection of comments left on the FCC's site have concluded that the process was dominated primarily by bots and automated systems, which may have hurt the perception of the process, making it easy to dismiss public opinion as the product of a relatively small number of people running automated campaigns.
"This year's comment volume dwarfed that and our analysis highlights the relative ease with which online commenting systems allow groups and individuals to mount large-scale campaigns for public policies.
Fortunately, The Register-Guard has an established community of long-time commenters who also flag any uncivil comments that make it onto the site.
Since our Civil Comments launch in February 2016 through Tuesday, our online readers have contributed 94,247 comments and 101,415 "reactions" to those comments (options include "Like," "Funny," "Disagree," "Sad" and "Wow").
Of the 94,247 total comments to date, 2.6 percent were rejected (2.3 percent by fellow commenters, 0.3 percent by staff moderators).
We, too, accepted that the most active commentary on our stories now occurred in social media, but we felt there was still a role for on-site comments. (Indeed, the two platforms can cross-fertilize each other in fruitful ways.) We believed that good comments could adorn and improve our journalism.
Finally, and most controversially, we decided that we wouldn't hesitate to censor comments or ban readers if they debased the site.
He still comments nearly every day, but he says, "On my side, I've learned to comment with more precision and less, let's say, personal involvement." He argues less aggressively and more honestly, and he cuts and pastes less and links to defensible research more.