THE ANALYSIS OF APPROACHES TO MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY EVALUATION FOR CALIBRATION

Sarsenbek Zhussupbekov, L. K. Ibrayeva, Sarsenbek Zhussupbekov

Informatyka Automatyka Pomiary w Gospodarce i Ochronie Środowiska, 2019

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.35784/iapgos.233
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

A comparative analysis of the measurement uncertainty estimation result is carried out. The results are obtained by GUM method described in the Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, as well as by Monte-Carlo method recommended in Supplement 1 to the Guide. Examples of calculations of uncertainty of relative error for electromagnetic flow meters calibration by two methods are given. The features of application, advantages and disadvantages of these methods are described.