Meaning and models in key comparisons, with measures of operability and interoperability

Metrologia

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2006, Pages

  Willink, R ^a  

^a CALLAGHAN INNOVATION   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ERROR ANALYSIS; INTEROPERABILITY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MEASUREMENTS; STANDARDIZATION; UNCERTAIN SYSTEMS;

KEY COMPARISONS; OPERABILITY; UNCERTAINTY COMPONENTS;

MEASUREMENT THEORY;

EID: 33746905550     PISSN: 00261394     EISSN: 16817575     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/0026-1394/43/4/S08     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Willink R 2006 Metrologia 2006 43 12-20
2. Steele A G, Wood B M and Douglas R J 2001 Metrologia 38 483-8
3. Chunovkina A G 2003 Meas. Techn. 46 409-14
4. Willink R 2003 Metrologia 40 9-17
5. Bureau International des Poids et Mesures 1999 Mutual recognition of national measurement standards and of calibration and measurement certificates issued by national metrology institutes
6. 1999 Guidelines for CIPM key comparisons www.bipm.org/pdf/guidelines.pdf
7. Cox M G 2002 Metrologia 39 587-8
8. Ciarlini P, Cox M, Pavese F and Regoliosi G 2004 Metrologia 41 116-21
9. Chunovkina A 2003 Simplified method for key comparison data evaluation. Evaluation of the degree of equivalence of the standards Data Analysis of Key Comparisons 178 (PTB-Seminar/International Workshop, Braunschweig and Berlin)
10. Elster C and Link A 2001 Meas. Sci. Technol. 12 1431-8
11. Pavese F 2005 Metrologia 42 L10-2
12. Ciarlini P and Pavese F 2003 Meas. Techn. 46 421-6
13. Kacker R N, Datla R U and Parr A C 2004 Metrologia 41 340-52
14. Kacker R N, Datla R U and Parr A C 2005 Metrologia 42 L13-4
15. Steele A G, Wood B M and Douglas R J 2005 Metrologia 42 32-8
16. Cox M G and Harris P M 2001 Towards an objective approach to key comparison reference values CIE Expert Symp. on Uncertainty Evaluation, Method for Analysis of Uncertainties in Optical Radiation Measurement (Vienna, 22-24 January)
17. Cox M 2000 A discussion of approaches for determining a reference value in the analysis of key-comparison data Advanced Mathematical and Computational Tools in Metrology IV ed P Ciarlini et al (Singapore: World Scientific) pp 45-65
18. Milton M J T and Cox M G 2003 Metrologia 40 L1-2
19. Chunovkina A and Cox M 2003 A model-based approach to key comparison data evaluation 17th IMEKO World Congress (June 22-27, Dubrovnik, Croatia)
20. Sutton C M 2004 Metrologia 41 272-7
21. Cox M G 2002 Metrologia 39 589-95
22. Iyer H K, Wang C M and Vecchia D F 2004 Metrologia 41 223-30
23. Willink R 2002 Metrologia 39 343-54
24. Nielsen L 1999 Evaluation of measurement intercomparisons by the method of least squares Report (Danish Institute of Fundamental Metrology)
25. White D R 2004 Metrologia 41 122-31
26. Iyer H K, Wang C M J and Mathew T 2004 J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 99 1060-71
27. Ruhkin A L and Vangel M G 1998 J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 93 303-8
28. Vangel M G and Ruhkin A L 1999 Biometrics 55 129-36
29. Deutler T 1991 J. Qual. Technol. 23 324-35
30. Kacker R N 2004 Metrologia 41 132-6
31. http://kcdb.bipm.org/AppendixB (CCPR-K4 results)
32. Montgomery D C 1991 Introduction to Statistical Quality Control 2nd edn (New York: Wiley)
33. Croarkin C 1989 Metrologia 26 107-13
34. Willink R 2006 Metrologia 43 S211-9
35. Kiefer J 1982 Conditional Inference Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences vol 2 ed S Kotz et al (New York: Wiley) pp 103-9
36. Willink R 2004 Metrologia 41 L5-6
37. Leone F C, Nelson L S and Nottingham R B 1961 Technometrics 3 543-50 Corr. 22 452
38. Johnson N L, Kotz S and Balakrishnan N 1994 Continuous Univariate Distributions vol 1 2nd edn (New York: Wiley)
39. Johnson N L, Kotz S and Balakrishnan N 1995 Continuous Univariate Distributions vol 2 2nd edn (New York: Wiley)