Evaluation of Inter-Laboratory Comparison Results: Representative Examples

被引:2
|
作者
Frahm, Enrico [1 ]
Wright, John [2 ]
机构
[1] Phys Tech Bundesanstalt, Dept Fluid Flow 1 5, Bundesallee 100, D-38116 Braunschweig, Germany
[2] NIST, 100 Bur Dr, Gaithersburg, MD 20899 USA
关键词
Inter-laboratory comparison; Transfer standard uncertainty; En criterion; Conclusiveness criteria; Probability approach;
D O I
10.1016/j.measurement.2023.113723
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
The primary purpose of inter-laboratory comparisons is to verify the CMC claims of the participating labora-tories. The most commonly used evaluation criterion, the normalized error |Eni|, has flaws, particularly if the comparison uncertainty ucomp,i is large relative to the reference standards being compared. According to the recommendations of CIPM Working Group for Fluid Flow, the uncertainty ucomp,i should be considered by including the uncertainty of the transfer standard and the repeatability of the calibrations. A review of previous comparison reports shows the importance of this task for many other measurands beside the field of fluid flow. In this paper, we propose the use of comparison uncertainty ucomp,i as a better tool for assessing the power of the comparison. We applied the comparison evaluation criteria to recent comparison results to illustrate their benefits over the |Eni|<= 1 criterion. A probability-based approach evaluates the comparison results and we recommend its usage in future comparisons.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] GRAPHICAL EVALUATION OF INTER-LABORATORY TEST RESULTS .2. APPLICATION IN PRACTICE
    BECKER, K
    SCHULTZE, GR
    ERDOL UND KOHLE ERDGAS PETROCHEMIE VEREINIGT MIT BRENNSTOFF-CHEMIE, 1970, 23 (07): : 423 - &
  • [42] PERFORMANCE EVALUATION BY INTER-LABORATORY SURVEYS - REPLY
    GRANNIS, GF
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, 1979, 25 (01) : 196 - 196
  • [43] INTER-LABORATORY EVALUATION OF AMINOTRANSFERASE ASSAYS - COMPARISON OF PRECISION WITH SCE AND IFCC METHODS
    GOLDBERG, DM
    DROBNIES, A
    PAPANASTASIOUDIAMANDI, A
    LUSTIG, V
    CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY, 1985, 18 (03) : 211 - 211
  • [44] Evaluation of methods for analysis of lead in air particulates: an intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory comparison
    Harrington, James M.
    Nelson, Clay M.
    Weber, Frank X.
    Bradham, Karen D.
    Levine, Keith E.
    Rice, Joann
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE-PROCESSES & IMPACTS, 2014, 16 (02) : 256 - 261
  • [45] Inter-laboratory comparison of S-parameter measurements with dynamic uncertainty evaluation
    Singh, D.
    Salter, M. J.
    Votsi, H.
    Ridler, N. M.
    2020 94TH ARFTG MICROWAVE MEASUREMENT SYMPOSIUM (ARFTG): RF TO MILLIMETER-WAVE MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES FOR 5G AND BEYOND, 2020,
  • [46] EVALUATION OF INTRA-LABORATORY AND INTER-LABORATORY VARIABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY
    ARVESEN, JN
    MELNICK, EL
    BIOMETRICS, 1979, 35 (04) : 883 - 883
  • [47] MARIHUANA ANALYSIS - RESULTS OF A RECENT INTER-LABORATORY SURVEY
    HANSEN, HJ
    LEWIS, DS
    BOONE, DJ
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, 1981, 27 (06) : 1104 - 1104
  • [48] Results for the "REINIEP 18" inter-laboratory comparison campaign for the measurement of uranium isotope ratios
    Richter, S.
    Wellum, R.
    GEOCHIMICA ET COSMOCHIMICA ACTA, 2006, 70 (18) : A532 - A532
  • [49] Buccal micronucleus cytome assay: results of an intra- and inter-laboratory scoring comparison
    Bolognesi, Claudia
    Roggieri, Paola
    Ropolo, Monica
    Thomas, Philip
    Hor, Maryam
    Fenech, Michael
    Nersesyan, Armen
    Knasmueller, Siegfried
    MUTAGENESIS, 2015, 30 (04) : 545 - 555
  • [50] HDL CHOLESTEROL - RESULTS OF INTER-LABORATORY PROFICIENCY TESTS
    WARNICK, GR
    ALBERS, JJ
    LEARY, ET
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, 1980, 26 (01) : 169 - 170