Comparative analysis of measurement accuracy characteristics

IF 0.1 Q4 INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION
I. Zakharov
{"title":"Comparative analysis of measurement accuracy characteristics","authors":"I. Zakharov","doi":"10.24027/2306-7039.4.2022.276328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The parallel coexistence of the error theory and the concept of uncertainty in Ukraine for almost 30 years has brought about constant discussions and raised the issue of their analysis and comparison. \nThe concept of uncertainty is the product of an international standardization process for the evaluation of measurement accuracy. The development of the concept was based on analysing and generalizing the documents on error evaluation, relevant in different countries, therefore many elements of both approaches coincide. Nevertheless, there are a number of mathematical, terminological, and conceptual differences that are considered in this paper. \nIt should be noted that while the development of the error theory stopped at the end of the 90s of the last century, the concept of uncertainty has been successfully developing since then thanks to the activities of the JCGM and a number of other international organizations. Along with the GUM, a variant of implementing the model approach has been introduced based on the Monte Carlo method, an empirical approach has been developed, and the revision of the GUM has been initiated based on the Bayesian inference. \nNevertheless, both concepts have internal contradictions and shortcomings, with which even their creators themselves agree. \nTherefore, the task of theoretical metrologists is to develop a unified theory for evaluating the accuracy of measurements, eliminating the shortcomings of both approaches. \nQuantitative differences of accuracy estimates in the theory of errors and the concept of uncertainty are considered, which are related to the ways of expressing and summing the components, as well as obtaining interval accuracy estimates. \nIn view of the imperfection of normative documents on the error theory, as well as the widespread use of the ISO/IEC 17025 standard in Ukraine, it is advisable to reformulate the curricula for metrological specialities replacing the theory of errors with the concept of uncertainty.","PeriodicalId":40775,"journal":{"name":"Ukrainian Metrological Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ukrainian Metrological Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24027/2306-7039.4.2022.276328","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The parallel coexistence of the error theory and the concept of uncertainty in Ukraine for almost 30 years has brought about constant discussions and raised the issue of their analysis and comparison. The concept of uncertainty is the product of an international standardization process for the evaluation of measurement accuracy. The development of the concept was based on analysing and generalizing the documents on error evaluation, relevant in different countries, therefore many elements of both approaches coincide. Nevertheless, there are a number of mathematical, terminological, and conceptual differences that are considered in this paper. It should be noted that while the development of the error theory stopped at the end of the 90s of the last century, the concept of uncertainty has been successfully developing since then thanks to the activities of the JCGM and a number of other international organizations. Along with the GUM, a variant of implementing the model approach has been introduced based on the Monte Carlo method, an empirical approach has been developed, and the revision of the GUM has been initiated based on the Bayesian inference. Nevertheless, both concepts have internal contradictions and shortcomings, with which even their creators themselves agree. Therefore, the task of theoretical metrologists is to develop a unified theory for evaluating the accuracy of measurements, eliminating the shortcomings of both approaches. Quantitative differences of accuracy estimates in the theory of errors and the concept of uncertainty are considered, which are related to the ways of expressing and summing the components, as well as obtaining interval accuracy estimates. In view of the imperfection of normative documents on the error theory, as well as the widespread use of the ISO/IEC 17025 standard in Ukraine, it is advisable to reformulate the curricula for metrological specialities replacing the theory of errors with the concept of uncertainty.
测量精度特性对比分析
误差理论和不确定性概念在乌克兰的平行共存近30年,引起了不断的讨论,并提出了对它们进行分析和比较的问题。不确定度的概念是评价测量精度的国际标准化过程的产物。这一概念的发展是基于分析和概括与不同国家有关的关于误差评价的文件,因此两种方法的许多要素是一致的。然而,在本文中考虑了许多数学、术语和概念上的差异。应当指出,虽然误差理论的发展是在上世纪90年代末停止的,但由于政策协商委员会和其他一些国际组织的活动,不确定性概念自那时以来一直在成功地发展。除了GUM之外,还引入了一种基于蒙特卡罗方法的实现模型方法的变体,开发了一种经验方法,并基于贝叶斯推理开始了对GUM的修订。然而,这两个概念都有其内在的矛盾和缺点,这一点连它们的创造者自己也认同。因此,理论计量学家的任务是发展一种统一的理论来评估测量的准确性,消除两种方法的缺点。考虑了误差理论和不确定性概念中精度估计的定量差异,这与分量的表示和求和方式以及区间精度估计的获得有关。鉴于误差理论的规范性文件的不完善,以及ISO/IEC 17025标准在乌克兰的广泛使用,建议用不确定度的概念取代误差理论来重新制定计量专业课程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ukrainian Metrological Journal
Ukrainian Metrological Journal INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信