4.7 Article

Relative uncertainty-based Bayesian interlaboratory consensus building

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 870, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.161977

关键词

Interlaboratory consensus; Environmental sampling; Measurement uncertainty; Bayesian inference

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An uncertainty-based Bayesian strategy was developed and tested among environmental laboratories to address the interlaboratory agreement problem. The proposed hybrid approach showed no sensitivity to outliers and had a transparent and robust agreement structure. The algorithmic procedure can explore both laboratory performances and conformity between independent samples.
An interlaboratory comparison is typically conducted among the laboratories for the purpose of providing quality assurance and control. To solve the interlaboratory agreement problem, a distinct type of metrological challenge, a new uncertainty-based Bayesian strategy was developed and tested among environmental laboratories. A holistic algorithm with the key phases of sampling, outlier analysis, recognition, and simulation-based structure identification was developed and is being addressed in place of conventional indices and plots. Computer simulations showed that the proposed hybrid approach has no discernible sensitivity to outliers and that the agreement structure is transparent and robust. Some meta-data is also generated by the analysis based on relative uncertainty. To measure the perfor-mance and capability of Bayesian consensus building algorithm, the uncertainty intervals were established and com-parative evaluations have been carried out using the conventional techniques. As a result, the suggested algorithm can explore both the laboratory performances (harmony) and the conformity between two independent samples. The algorithmic procedure features a generalizable framework that may be adapted in other fields to obtain a consen-sus among the laboratories.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据