Analysis and Comparison of Hyper-Ellipsoidal and Smallest Coverage Regions for Multivariate Monte Carlo Measurement Uncertainty Analysis Simulation Datasets
Traditionally metrology systems have been analysed for measurement uncertainties in terms of the frequency statistics-based Guide to the Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM); however, a key challenge in the application of the GUM has been in terms of its inherent limitations and internal inconsistencies with Type A and Type B uncertainties in adequately and accurately determining appropriate coverage intervals and regions for measurement uncertainty results. Subsequently in order to address these particular issues the Bayesian statistical-based GUM supplements for univariate and multivariate models were developed that supersede the original GUM and which resolve these challenges. In this paper, a GUM supplement 2 uncertainty analysis for a multivariate oil pressure balance model is numerically implemented using an experimental dataset, and then the multivariate Monte Carlo method simulation results are processed in order to construct and study the corresponding optimal hyper-ellipsoidal and smallest coverage regions for bivariate and trivariate distributions with new proposed numerical algorithms for specified probability levels. The results are then further investigated in order to study the accuracy, validity limits and potential confidence region implications for measurement models that exhibit non-Gaussian joint probability density function distributions.
KeywordsUncertainty analysis Monte Carlo method GUM supplement 2 Multivariate confidence region Pressure metrology
This work was performed with funds provided by the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) on behalf of the South African government for research by public universities.
- BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAP, OIML, Evaluation of measurement data—guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, Tech. Rep., JCGM/WG1 GUM (2008), Revised 1st edition—https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/.
- BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAP, OIML, Evaluation of measurement data—Supplement 1 to the “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement”—Propogation of distributions using a Monte Carlo method, Tech. Rep., JCGM/WG1 GUM Supplement 1 (2008), 1st edition—https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/.
- BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAP, OIML, Evaluation of measurement data—Supplement 2 to the “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement”—Propogation of distributions using a Monte Carlo method, Tech. Rep., JCGM/WG1 GUM Supplement 2 (2011), 1st edition—https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/.
- CGPM. Resolution 1 of the 26th CGPM—On the revision of the international system of units (SI) (2018). https://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/CGPM-2018/26th-CGPM-Resolutions.pdf.
- R.S. Dadson, S.L. Lewis, G.N. Peggs, The Pressure Balance: Theory and Practice (HMSO: London, 1982). ISBN 0114800480.Google Scholar
- K. Jousten, J. Hendricks, D. Barker, K. Douglas, S. Eckel, P. Egan, J. Fedchak, J. Flugge, C. Gaiser, D. Olson, J. Ricker, T. Rubin, W. Sabuga, J. Scherschligt, R. Schodel, U. Sterr, J. Stone, G. Strouse, Perspectives for a new realization of the pascal by optical methods, Metrologia, 54 (2017) S146–S161. https://doi.org/10.1088/1681-7575/aa8a4d.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- B. Blagojevic, I. Bajic, in Metrology in the 3rd Millennium, XVII. IMEKO World Congress, (IMEKO, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2003), pp. 1982–1985. ISBN: 953-7124-00-2.Google Scholar
- S. Yadav, V.K. Gupta, A.K. Bandyopadhyay, Standardisation of pressure measurement using pressure balance as transfer standard, MAPAN - J. Metrol. Soc. India, 26(2) (2011) 133–151.Google Scholar
- D.W. Scott, S.R. Sain, in Handbook of statistics—Data mining and data visualization, ed. by C.R. Rao, E.J. Wegman, J.L. Solka (Elsevier, Oxford, 2005), chap. 9, pp. 229–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7161(04)24009-3.