Documenting uncertainty dependent on analyte level
E.4: Documenting uncertainty dependent on analyte level
E.4.1 Introduction
approximation can be obtained by simple linear regression through four or more
E.4.1.1 It is often observed in chemical
combined uncertainties obtained at different
measurement that, over a large range of analyte
analyte concentrations. This procedure is
levels, dominant contributions to the overall
consistent with that employed in studies of
uncertainty vary approximately proportionately to
reproducibility and repeatability according to
the level of analyte, that is u(x) ∝ x. In such cases
ISO 5725:1994. The relevant expression is
it is often sensible to quote uncertainties as
then u x () ≈ s ' 0 + xs .' 1
relative standard deviations or, for example,
E.4.2.2 The figure can be divided into coefficient of variation (%CV).
approximate regions (A to C on the figure):
E.4.1.2 Where the uncertainty is unaffected by
A : The uncertainty is dominated by the term s 0 , level, for example at low levels, or where a and is approximately constant and close to s 0 . relatively narrow range of analyte level is
involved, it is generally most sensible to quote an
B : Both terms contribute significantly; the absolute value for the uncertainty.
resulting uncertainty is significantly higher than either s 0 or xs 1 , and some curvature is
E.4.1.3 In some cases, both constant and
visible.
proportional effects are important. This section sets out a general approach to recording
C : The term xs 1 dominates; the uncertainty rises uncertainty information where variation of
approximately linearly with increasing x and uncertainty with analyte level is an issue and
is close to xs 1 .
reporting as a simple coefficient of variation is
E.4.2.3 Note that in many experimental cases the inadequate. complete form of the curve will not be apparent.
Very often, the whole reporting range of analyte
E.4.2 Basis of approach
level permitted by the scope of the method falls
E.4.2.1 To allow for both proportionality of within a single chart region; the result is a number uncertainty and the possibility of an essentially
of special cases dealt with in more detail below. constant value with level, the following general
expression is used: E.4.3 Documenting level-dependent
uncertainty data
E.4.3.1 In general, uncertainties can be documented in the form of a value for each of s 0
where and s 1 . The values can be used to provide an
u (x) is the combined standard uncertainty in the uncertainty estimate across the scope of the result x (that is, the uncertainty expressed
method. This is particularly valuable when as a standard deviation)
calculations for well characterised methods are s 0 represents a constant contribution to the
implemented on computer systems, where the overall uncertainty
general form of the equation can be implemented s 1 is a proportionality constant.
independently of the values of the parameters (one of which may be zero - see below). It is
The expression is based on the normal method of accordingly recommended that, except in the combining of two contributions to overall
special cases outlined below or where the
dependence is strong but not linear * , uncertainties constant and one (xs 1 ) proportional to the result.
uncertainty, assuming one contribution (s 0 ) is
Figure E.4.1 shows the form of this expression.
* An important example of non-linear dependence is N OTE : The approach above is practical only where it
the effect of instrument noise on absorbance is possible to calculate a large number of
measurement at high absorbances near the upper limit values. Where experimental study is
of the instrument capability. This is particularly employed, it will not often be possible to
pronounced where absorbance is calculated from establish the relevant parabolic relationship. In
transmittance (as in infrared spectroscopy). Under such circumstances, an adequate
these circumstances, baseline noise causes very large uncertainties in high absorbance figures, and the
Page 108
Quantifying Uncertainty Appendix E – Statistical Procedures
are documented in the form of values for a estimates, when required, can then be produced
on the basis of the reported result. This remains term represented by s 1 .
constant term represented by s 0 and a variable
the recommended approach where practical.
E.4.4. Special cases
N OTE : See the note to section E.4.2.
b) Applying a fixed approximation analyte (s 0 dominant)
E.4.4.1. Uncertainty not dependent on level of
An alternative which may be used in general The uncertainty will generally be effectively
testing and where
independent of observed analyte concentration when:
• the dependence is not strong (that is, • evidence for proportionality is weak)
The result is close to zero (for example,
or
within the stated detection limit for the • the range of results expected is moderate method). Region A in Figure E.4.1
• leading in either case to uncertainties which do The possible range of results (stated in the
not vary by more than about 15% from an method scope or in a statement of scope for
average uncertainty estimate, it will often be the uncertainty estimate) is small compared to
reasonable to calculate and quote a fixed value of the observed level.
uncertainty for general use, based on the mean
value of results expected. That is, recorded as zero. s 0 is normally the calculated
Under these circumstances, the value of s 1 can be
either
standard uncertainty.
a mean or typical value for x is used to
E.4.4.2. Uncertainty entirely dependent on
calculate a fixed uncertainty estimate, and this
analyte (s 1 dominant)
is used in place of individually calculated estimates
Where the result is far from zero (for example, above a ‘limit of determination’) and there is
or
clear evidence that the uncertainty changes
a single standard deviation has been obtained, proportionally with the level of analyte permitted
based on studies of materials covering the full within the scope of the method, the term xs 1 range of analyte levels permitted (within the
dominates (see Region C in Figure E.4.1). Under scope of the uncertainty estimate), and there is these circumstances, and where the method scope
little evidence to justify an assumption of does not include levels of analyte near zero, s 0 proportionality. This should generally be
treated as a case of zero dependence, and the simply the uncertainty expressed as a relative
may reasonably be recorded as zero and s 1 is
relevant standard deviation recorded as s 0 . standard deviation.
E.4.5. Determining s 0 and s 1
E.4.5.1. In the special cases in which one term In intermediate cases, and in particular where the
E.4.4.3. Intermediate dependence
dominates, it will normally be sufficient to use the situation corresponds to region B in Figure E.4.1,
uncertainty as standard deviation or relative two approaches can be taken:
standard deviation respectively as values of s 0 and s 1 . Where the dependence is less obvious,
however, it may be necessary to determine s 0 and The more general approach is to determine,
a) Applying variable dependence
s 1 indirectly from a series of estimates of
record and use both s 0 and s 1 . Uncertainty
uncertainty at different analyte levels.
E.4.5.2. Given a calculation of combined
uncertainty from the various components, some of
uncertainty rises much faster than a simple linear
which depend on analyte level while others do
estimate would predict. The usual approach is to
not, it will normally be possible to investigate the
reduce the absorbance, typically by dilution, to bring
dependence of overall uncertainty on analyte level
the absorbance figures well within the working range;
by simulation. The procedure is as follows:
the linear model used here will then normally be adequate. Other examples include the ‘sigmoidal’ response of some immunoassay methods.
Page 109
Quantifying Uncertainty Appendix E – Statistical Procedures
1: Calculate (or obtain experimentally) where the uncertainty as standard deviation is uncertainties u(x i ) for at least ten levels x i of
calculated as above, and if necessary expanded analyte, covering the full range permitted.
(usually by a factor of two) to give increased
2 2. Plot u(x 2
i ) against x i confidence. Where a number of results are reported together, however, it may be possible,
3. By linear regression, obtain estimates of m
2 2 and is perfectly acceptable, to give an estimate of and c for the line u(x) = mx +c uncertainty applicable to all results reported.
4. Calculate s 0 and s 1 from s 0 = √ c, s 1 = √ m
E.4.6.2. Table E.4.1 gives some examples. The
5. Record s 0 and s 1 uncertainty figures for a list of different analytes
E.4.6 . Reporting may usefully be tabulated following similar
principles.
E.4.6.1.
The approach outlined here permits estimation of a standard uncertainty for any single
N OTE : Where a ‘detection limit’ or ‘reporting limit’
result. In principle, where uncertainty information
is used to give results in the form “<x” or
is to be reported, it will be in the form of
“nd”, it will normally be necessary to quote the limits used in addition to the uncertainties
[result] ± [uncertainty]
applicable to results above reporting limits.
Table E.4.1: Summarising uncertainty for several samples Situation
Dominant term
Reporting example(s)
Uncertainty essentially constant
Standard deviation: expanded across all results
s 0 or fixed approximation
(sections E.4.4.1. or E.4.4.3.a) uncertainty; 95% confidence
interval
Uncertainty generally xs 1 relative standard deviation; proportional to level
coefficient of variance (%CV) Mixture of proportionality and
(see section E.4.4.2.)
quote %CV or rsd together with lower limiting value for
Intermediate case
lower limit as standard uncertainty
(section E.4.4.3.)
deviation.
Page 110
Quantifying Uncertainty Appendix E – Statistical Procedures
Figure E.4.1: Variation of uncertainty with observed result
Uncertainty u(x)
1.6 Uncertainty significantly
Uncertainty
greater than
approximately 1.4 either s 0 or x.s 1 equal to x.s 1