To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluation of uncertainty in the adjustment of fundamental constants
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Berlin, Germany.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1359-3311
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Berlin, Germany.
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Berlin, Germany.
US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg MD, USA.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: Metrologia, ISSN 0026-1394, E-ISSN 1681-7575, Vol. 53, no 1, p. 46-54Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Combining multiple measurement results for the same quantity is an important task in metrology and in many other areas. Examples include the determination of fundamental constants, the calculation of reference values in interlaboratory comparisons, or the meta-analysis of clinical studies. However, neither the GUM nor its supplements give any guidance for this task. Various approaches are applied such as weighted least-squares in conjunction with the Birge ratio or random effects models. While the former approach, which is based on a location-scale model, is particularly popular in metrology, the latter represents a standard tool used in statistics for meta-analysis. We investigate the reliability and robustness of the location-scale model and the random effects model with particular focus on resulting coverage or credible intervals. The interval estimates are obtained by adopting a Bayesian point of view in conjunction with a non-informative prior that is determined by a currently favored principle for selecting non-informative priors. Both approaches are compared by applying them to simulated data as well as to data for the Planck constant and the Newtonian constant of gravitation. Our results suggest that the proposed Bayesian inference based on the random effects model is more reliable and less sensitive to model misspecifications than the approach based on the location-scale model.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BIPM & IOP Publishing Ltd , 2016. Vol. 53, no 1, p. 46-54
Keywords [en]
fundamental constants, meta-analysis, interlaboratory comparisons, Bayesian inference, location-scale model, random effects model
National Category
Probability Theory and Statistics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-76713DOI: 10.1088/0026-1394/53/1/s46ISI: 000372331500011Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84957603730OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-76713DiVA, id: diva2:1354138
Available from: 2019-09-24 Created: 2019-09-24 Last updated: 2023-11-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Bodnar, Olha

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bodnar, Olha
In the same journal
Metrologia
Probability Theory and Statistics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 89 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf