Similarity | Rank | |
---|---|---|
efficient | 0.773 | 2805 |
very_efficient | 0.720 | 93713 |
high_efficiency | 0.713 | 32026 |
an_efficient | 0.703 | 16489 |
cost-efficient | 0.663 | 81922 |
the_most_efficient | 0.650 | 31596 |
cost-effective | 0.632 | 12088 |
more_efficient | 0.628 | 7315 |
cost_efficient | 0.624 | 94706 |
energy-efficient | 0.618 | 52317 |
high-performance | 0.618 | 27703 |
energy_efficient | 0.610 | 29579 |
highly_effective | 0.595 | 35554 |
cost_effective | 0.594 | 15101 |
a_more_efficient | 0.594 | 42459 |
a_cost-effective | 0.587 | 69744 |
environmentally_friendly | 0.585 | 19984 |
high_performance | 0.584 | 12154 |
scalable | 0.581 | 14958 |
versatile | 0.575 | 11816 |
most_efficient | 0.574 | 72519 |
environmentally-friendly | 0.568 | 98360 |
state-of-the-art | 0.552 | 13114 |
multifunctional | 0.551 | 60873 |
efficiency_of | 0.551 | 5753 |