Methods for evaluating the reference value in laboratory intercomparisons of dimensional measurements

Jack A. Stone

doi:10.1117/12.617952

18 August 2005 Methods for evaluating the reference value in laboratory intercomparisons of dimensional measurements

Jack A. Stone

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 5879, Recent Developments in Traceable Dimensional Measurements III; 58790V (2005) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.617952
Event: Optics and Photonics 2005, 2005, San Diego, California, United States

Abstract

A number of methods have been proposed to evaluate the reference value for intercomparisons of laboratory measurements. Methods for establishing the reference value include the arithmetic mean, weighted mean (with weights proportional to the reciprocals of the squared uncertainties), median, and total median. In addition, it has been suggested that it might be possible to modify the weighted mean, using iterative approaches to automatically eliminate outliers or to modify the weights in light of the results of the intercomparison. No single one of the analysis methods is best for all circumstances, nor can the efficiency of any method be determined without making assumptions about the underlying nature of the intercomparison. (How well do the participants evaluate their uncertainties? What is the underlying distribution of errors, including outliers? Are the errors correlated between one laboratory and the next?) Although there is considerable divergence of opinion as to what constitutes realistic assumptions, completed international comparisons can begin to provide at least rough guidance for constructing models. In this paper, I will try to construct models that are consistent with what we have learned thus far from CCL (Consultative Committee for Length) key comparisons in the field of dimensional metrology. Based on such models, I have explored various methods for establishing a reference value, to determine which methods are likely to produce a reference value with a low uncertainty. As would be expected, there is no single method that is always superior; results depend on both the underlying assumptions and on the spread and distribution of claimed uncertainties of the participating laboratories.

Citation Download Citation

Jack A. Stone "Methods for evaluating the reference value in laboratory intercomparisons of dimensional measurements", Proc. SPIE 5879, Recent Developments in Traceable Dimensional Measurements III, 58790V (18 August 2005); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.617952

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

;

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE