Abstract
In this paper we give the results of four methods of calculating uncertainty associated with a mass calibration problem, three based on different implementations – the first and second order law of propagation of uncertainty and the Monte Carlo method – of the general methodology described by the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, the fourth based on a Bayesian formulation. The nonlinearities present in the model for the calibration problem means that the first order approach can be an unreliable method for evaluating uncertainties, relative to the other three approaches.
Export citation and abstract BibTeX RIS
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
References
- [1]JCGM 100:2008 1995 Evaluation of measurement data – Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement
- [2]JCGM 101:2008 Evaluation of measurement data – Supplement 1 to the "Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement" – Propagation of distributions using a Monte Carlo method
- [3]Cox M G and Harris P M 2006 Software Support for Metrology Best Practice Guide NO 6, Uncertainty Evaluation
- [4]Forbes A B 2012 Approaches to evaluating measurement uncertainty Int. J. Metrology Quality Eng. 3 71-77
- [5]Elster C, Wöger W and Cox M G 2007 Draft GUM supplement 1 and Bayesian analysis Metrologia 44 L31:L32
- [6]Forbes A B and Sousa J A 2011 The GUM, Bayesian inference and the observation and measurement equations Meas. 44 1422-1435
- [7]Forbes A B 2012 An MCMC algorithm based on GUM Supplement 1 for uncertainty evaluation Meas. 45 1188-1199
- [8]Nielsen, L 2002