The evaluation of key comparison data: Determining the largest consistent subset

Metrologia

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 187-200

  Cox, Maurice G ^a  

^a NATIONAL PHYSICAL LABORATORY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATABASE SYSTEMS; IONIZING RADIATION; MEASUREMENT THEORY; STATISTICAL METHODS;

LARGEST CONSISTENT SUBSET (LCS); NATIONAL METROLOGY INSTITUTES (NMI);

SET THEORY;

EID: 34249743115     PISSN: 00261394     EISSN: 16817575     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/0026-1394/44/3/005     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Benjamin A T and Quinn J J 2003 Proofs That Really Count (Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America)
2. BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP and OIML Evaluation of Measurement Data-Supplement 1 to the 'Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement'-Propagation of Distributions using a Monte Carlo Method in preparation Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, Bureau International des Poids et Mesures
3. BIPM 1999 Mutual recognition of national measurement standards and of calibration and measurement certificates issued by national metrology institutes Technical Report Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, Sèvres, France
4. Collett M A, Cox M G, Esward T J, Harris P M and Sousa J A 2007 Aggregating measurement data influenced by common effects Metrologia submitted
5. Cox M G, Eiø C, Mana G and Pennecchi F 2006 The generalized weighted mean of correlated quantities Metrologia 43 S268-75
6. Cox M G, Harris P M and Woolliams E R 2005 Data evaluation of key comparisons involving linked bilateral measurements and multiple artefacts NCSL International Workshop and Symposium (Washington, USA)
7. Cox M G 1999 A discussion of approaches for determining a reference value in the analysis of key-comparison data Technical Report CISE 42/99 National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK
8. Cox M G 2002 The evaluation of key comparison data Metrologia 39 589-95
9. Decker J E, Brown N, Cox M G, Steele A G and Douglas R J 2006 Recent decisions of the Consultative Committee for Length (CCL) regarding strategies for evaluating key comparison data Metrologia 43 L51-5
10. Elster C, Wöger W and Cox M G 2005 Analysis of key comparison data: unstable travelling standards Meas. Tech. 48 883-93
11. Heydorn K 2006 The determination of an accepted reference value from proficiency data with stated uncertainties Accred. Qual. Assur. 10 479-84
12. ISO 2007 International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology 3rd edn (Draft) (Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardisation) at press
13. Iyer H K, Wang C M and Vecchia D F 2004 Consistency tests for key comparison data Metrologia 41 223-30
14. Nielsen L 2002 Identification and handling of discrepant measurements in key comparisons Technical Report DFM-02-R28 Danish Institute of Fundamental Metrology, Denmark
15. Nubbemeyer H G and Fischer J 2002 Final report on key comparison CCT-K4 of local realizations of aluminium and silver freezing-point temperatures Metrologia 39 (Tech. Suppl.) 03001
16. 192Ir and links for the international comparison CCRI(II)-K2.Ir-192 Metrologia 41 (Tech. Suppl.) 06013
17. 75Se and links for the international comparison CCRI(II)-K2.Se-75 Metrologia 41 (Tech. Suppl.) 06007
18. Steele A G and Douglas R J 2006 Extending chi-squared statistics for key comparisons in metrology J. Comput. Appl. Math. 192 51-8
19. Sutton C M 2004 Analysis and linking of international measurement comparisons Metrologia 41 272-7
20. Thalmann R 2002 CCL key comparison: calibration of gauge blocks by interferometry Metrologia 39 165-77
21. n criterion used in measurement comparisons PTB-Mitteilungen 109 24-7
22. Wöger W 2005 Remarks on the key comparison reference value NCSL International Workshop and Symposium (Washington, USA)