Abstract
All measurements have uncertainty and they are not absolute. Therefore, identification, determination and evaluation of critical influencing factors based on recent approaches are important and necessary. Laboratories shall identify and evaluate all components and contributions to measurement uncertainty. In this article, two different approaches for evaluation of measurement uncertainty of arsenic in rice are studied and compared. These different approaches are GUM approach and Monte Carlo approach. The results clarified, evaluated uncertainty for the measurand was the same in the GUM and MCA, statistically and it is clarified that evaluated uncertainty by these approaches have no significant difference.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- \(\rho\) :
-
Density
- m:
-
Mass
- V:
-
Volume
- u :
-
Standard uncertainty
- u c :
-
Combined standard uncertainty
- U:
-
Expanded uncertainty
- Ci :
-
Sensitivity coefficient
- k:
-
Coverage factor
- ucal :
-
Calibration uncertainty
- u rep :
-
Repeatability uncertainty
- u temp :
-
Temperature effect uncertainty
- u v :
-
Volume uncertainty
- u m :
-
Mass uncertainty
- u Ccal :
-
Calibration curve uncertainty
- ΔT:
-
Temperature deviation from 20 °C
- \(C_{{C_{cal} }}\) :
-
Sensitivity coefficient of calibration curve
- Cv :
-
Sensitivity coefficient of volume
- Cm :
-
Sensitivity coefficient of mass
- Ccal :
-
Concentration from calibration curve
- CF :
-
Final concentration
- M:
-
Number of measurements to determine c0
- N:
-
Number of measurements for the calibration
- Sm :
-
residual standard deviation
- m:
-
slope
- \(s_{{\overline{x}}}\) :
-
standard deviation of the averages
- MS:
-
Mean square
- DF:
-
Degree of freedom
- SS:
-
Sum of square
- F:
-
F statistics
- P:
-
P value
- Sr :
-
Within-laboratory (Repeatability) standard deviation
- Sl :
-
Between-laboratory (Intermediate) standard deviation
- SR :
-
Reproducibility standard deviation
- p:
-
Number of subgroups
References:
ISO/IEC GUIDE 98-1 (2009) Uncertainty of Measurement - Part 1: Introduction to the expression of uncertainty in measurement.
ISO/IEC GUIDE 99 (2007) International Vocabulary of Metrology - Basic and General Concepts and Associated Terms (VIM).
ISO/IEC GUIDE 98-3 (2008) Uncertainty of measurement - Part 3: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement.
ISO 21748 (2017) Guidance for the Use of Repeatability, Reproducibility and Trueness Estimates in Measurement Uncertainty Evaluation.
EURACHEM / CITAC Guide CG 4, QUAM (2012) Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement.
EURACHEM/CITAC, Produced Jointly with EUROLAB, Nordtest and the UK RSC Analytical Methods Committee (2007) Guide Measurement Uncertainty Arising from Sampling: A Guide to Methods and Approaches.
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.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for financial support from the Meyar Danesh Pars Company and also the University of Kashan with Grant No. of 52798.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nabi, M., Ghoreishi, S.M. & Behpour, M. Uncertainty in Analytical Measurements: Approaches, Evaluation Methods and Their Comparison Based on a Case Study of Arsenic Determination in Rice. MAPAN 36, 187–192 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-020-00422-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-020-00422-0