{"title":"根据两个估计方差分量计算的扩大测量不确定性的改进覆盖因子","authors":"Peter D. Rostron, Tom Fearn, Michael H. Ramsey","doi":"10.1007/s00769-024-01579-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Measurement uncertainty (MU) arising at different stages of a measurement process can be estimated using analysis of variance (ANOVA) on replicated measurements. It is common practice to derive an expanded MU by multiplying the resulting standard deviation by a coverage factor <i>k.</i> This coverage factor then defines an interval around a measurement value within which the value of the measurand, or true value, is asserted to lie for a desired confidence level (e.g. 95 %). A value of <i>k</i> = 2 is often used to obtain approximate 95 % coverage, although <i>k</i> = 2 will be an underestimate when the standard deviation is estimated from a limited amount of data. An alternative is to use Student’s <i>t-</i>distribution to provide a value for <i>k</i>, but this requires an exact or approximate degrees of freedom (df). This paper explores two different methods of deriving an appropriate <i>k</i> in the case when two variances from an ANOVA (classical or robust) need to be combined to estimate the measurement variance. Simulations show that both methods using the modified coverage factor generally produce a confidence interval much closer to the desired level (e.g. 95 %) when the data are approximately normally distributed. When these confidence intervals do deviate from 95 %, they are consistently conservative (i.e. reported coverage is higher than the nominal 95 %). When outlying values are included at the level of the larger variance component, in some cases the method used for robust ANOVA produces confidence intervals that are very conservative.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":454,"journal":{"name":"Accreditation and Quality Assurance","volume":"29 3","pages":"225 - 230"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00769-024-01579-w.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improved coverage factors for expanded measurement uncertainty calculated from two estimated variance components\",\"authors\":\"Peter D. Rostron, Tom Fearn, Michael H. Ramsey\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00769-024-01579-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Measurement uncertainty (MU) arising at different stages of a measurement process can be estimated using analysis of variance (ANOVA) on replicated measurements. It is common practice to derive an expanded MU by multiplying the resulting standard deviation by a coverage factor <i>k.</i> This coverage factor then defines an interval around a measurement value within which the value of the measurand, or true value, is asserted to lie for a desired confidence level (e.g. 95 %). A value of <i>k</i> = 2 is often used to obtain approximate 95 % coverage, although <i>k</i> = 2 will be an underestimate when the standard deviation is estimated from a limited amount of data. An alternative is to use Student’s <i>t-</i>distribution to provide a value for <i>k</i>, but this requires an exact or approximate degrees of freedom (df). This paper explores two different methods of deriving an appropriate <i>k</i> in the case when two variances from an ANOVA (classical or robust) need to be combined to estimate the measurement variance. Simulations show that both methods using the modified coverage factor generally produce a confidence interval much closer to the desired level (e.g. 95 %) when the data are approximately normally distributed. When these confidence intervals do deviate from 95 %, they are consistently conservative (i.e. reported coverage is higher than the nominal 95 %). When outlying values are included at the level of the larger variance component, in some cases the method used for robust ANOVA produces confidence intervals that are very conservative.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accreditation and Quality Assurance\",\"volume\":\"29 3\",\"pages\":\"225 - 230\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00769-024-01579-w.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accreditation and Quality Assurance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00769-024-01579-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accreditation and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00769-024-01579-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
测量过程不同阶段产生的测量不确定度 (MU) 可通过对重复测量进行方差分析 (ANOVA) 来估算。通常的做法是将由此得出的标准偏差乘以覆盖因子 k,从而得出一个扩展的 MU。该覆盖因子定义了测量值周围的一个区间,在该区间内,测量值或真值被认为处于所需的置信水平(例如 95%)。通常使用 k = 2 的值来获得近似 95 % 的覆盖率,不过在根据有限数据估算标准偏差时,k = 2 的值会被低估。另一种方法是使用学生 t 分布来提供 k 值,但这需要精确或近似的自由度 (df)。本文探讨了在需要结合方差分析(经典方差分析或稳健方差分析)中的两个方差来估计测量方差的情况下,推导适当 k 值的两种不同方法。模拟结果表明,当数据近似正态分布时,使用修正覆盖因子的两种方法通常都能得出更接近理想水平(如 95 %)的置信区间。当这些置信区间偏离 95 % 时,它们始终是保守的(即报告的覆盖率高于标称的 95 %)。当在较大方差分量的水平上包含离群值时,在某些情况下,稳健方差分析所使用的方法会产生非常保守的置信区间。
Improved coverage factors for expanded measurement uncertainty calculated from two estimated variance components
Measurement uncertainty (MU) arising at different stages of a measurement process can be estimated using analysis of variance (ANOVA) on replicated measurements. It is common practice to derive an expanded MU by multiplying the resulting standard deviation by a coverage factor k. This coverage factor then defines an interval around a measurement value within which the value of the measurand, or true value, is asserted to lie for a desired confidence level (e.g. 95 %). A value of k = 2 is often used to obtain approximate 95 % coverage, although k = 2 will be an underestimate when the standard deviation is estimated from a limited amount of data. An alternative is to use Student’s t-distribution to provide a value for k, but this requires an exact or approximate degrees of freedom (df). This paper explores two different methods of deriving an appropriate k in the case when two variances from an ANOVA (classical or robust) need to be combined to estimate the measurement variance. Simulations show that both methods using the modified coverage factor generally produce a confidence interval much closer to the desired level (e.g. 95 %) when the data are approximately normally distributed. When these confidence intervals do deviate from 95 %, they are consistently conservative (i.e. reported coverage is higher than the nominal 95 %). When outlying values are included at the level of the larger variance component, in some cases the method used for robust ANOVA produces confidence intervals that are very conservative.
期刊介绍:
Accreditation and Quality Assurance has established itself as the leading information and discussion forum for all aspects relevant to quality, transparency and reliability of measurement results in chemical and biological sciences. The journal serves the information needs of researchers, practitioners and decision makers dealing with quality assurance and quality management, including the development and application of metrological principles and concepts such as traceability or measurement uncertainty in the following fields: environment, nutrition, consumer protection, geology, metallurgy, pharmacy, forensics, clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, and microbiology.