{"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.