and the collisional radiative results of @summersRAL for a sample of ions and temperatures, as a function of density. \[figsurvey\] ](Fig2b.eps "fig:"){width="3.2in"}
  ![ A comparison between the present parameterized suppression factor and the collisional radiative results of @summersRAL for a sample of ions and temperatures, as a function of density. \[figsurvey\] ](Fig2c.eps "fig:"){width="3.2in"}   ![ A comparison between the present parameterized suppression factor and the collisional radiative results of @summersRAL for a sample of ions and temperatures, as a function of density. \[figsurvey\] ](Fig2d.eps "fig:"){width="3.2in"}
  ![ A comparison between the present parameterized suppression factor and the collisional radiative results of @summersRAL for a sample of ions and temperatures, as a function of density. \[figsurvey\] ](Fig2e.eps "fig:"){width="3.2in"}   ![ A comparison between the present parameterized suppression factor and the collisional radiative results of @summersRAL for a sample of ions and temperatures, as a function of density. \[figsurvey\] ](Fig2f.eps "fig:"){width="3.2in"}
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In order to quantify more fully the extent of agreement, we focus on the case of iron ions, for which we study density effects on ionization balance determination in the next section. A comparison is shown in Fig. \[figiron\] between our predicted suppression factors and the data from the @summersRAL report.

![\[figiron\] 