2012/03/01 by J F Clare, John F Clare, Clare, John F +5
Decision Sciences · Mathematics · Physics and Astronomy · #Advanced Statistical Methods and Models #Advanced Statistical Process Monitoring #Applications (stat.AP) #Data Analysis #FOS: Computer and information sciences #FOS: Physical sciences #Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation #Statistics and Probability (physics.data-an) #physics.data-an #stat.AP
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1203.0335
11 pages, 1 figure
openalex publication_date 2012/03/01 · arxiv created 2012/05/08 · arxiv updated 2012/05/09 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
We consider the evaluation of laboratory practice through the comparison of measurements made by participating metrology laboratories when the measurement procedures are considered to have both fixed effects (the residual error due to unrecognised sources of error) and random effects (drawn from a distribution of known variance after correction for all known systematic errors). We show that, when estimating the participant fixed effects, the random effects described can be ignored. We also derive the adjustment to the variance estimates of the participant fixed effects due to these random effects.