Uncertainty evaluation in normalization of isotope delta measurement results against international reference materials
- 70 Downloads
Isotope delta measurements are normalized against international reference standards. Although multi-point normalization is becoming a standard practice, the existing uncertainty evaluation practices are either undocumented or are incomplete. For multi-point normalization, we present errors-in-variables regression models for explicit accounting of the measurement uncertainty of the international standards along with the uncertainty that is attributed to their assigned values. This manuscript presents framework to account for the uncertainty that arises due to a small number of replicate measurements and discusses multi-laboratory data reduction while accounting for inevitable correlations between the laboratories due to the use of identical reference materials for calibration. Both frequentist and Bayesian methods of uncertainty analysis are discussed.
KeywordsIsotope delta Normalization Uncertainty evaluation Random effects model
The authors have benefited from discussions with Blaza Toman, National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interests
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Schimmelmann A, Qi H, Coplen TB, Brand WA, Fong J, Meier-Augenstein W, Kemp HF, Toman B, Ackermann A, Assonov S, Aerts-Bijma AT, Brejcha R, Chikaraishi Y, Darwish T, Elsner M, Gehre M, Geilmann H, Gröning M, Hélie JF, Herrero-Martín S, Meijer HAJ, Sauer PE, Sessions AL, Werner RA. Organic reference materials for hydrogen, carbon, and nitrogen stable isotope-ratio measurements: caffeines, n-alkanes, fatty acid methyl esters, glycines, l-valines, polyethylenes, and oils. Anal Chem 2016;88:4294–4302. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b04392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Carter JF, Barwick VJ. 2011. Good Practice Guide for Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (FIRMS) ISBN 978-0-948926-31-0.Google Scholar
- 11.ISO 6143:2001. 2001. Gas analysis – comparison methods for determining and checking the composition of calibration gas mixtures International Organization for Standardization Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
- 13.Possolo AM. 2015. Simple guide for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST Measurement Results, Technical Note 1900 (NIST).Google Scholar
- 18.BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, OIML. 2011. Supplement 2 to the ‘Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement’ – Extension to any number of output quantities, JCGM 102:2011 (BIPM).Google Scholar
- 21.Carroll RJ, Ruppert D, Stefanski LA, Crainiceanu CM. 2006. Measurement Error in Nonlinear Models: A Modern Perspective, Second Edition (Chapman and Hall/CRC) ISBN 1584886331 .Google Scholar
- 22.Coplen TB, Shrestha Y. 2016. Isotope-abundance variations and atomic weights of selected elements: 2016 (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure and Applied Chemistry 88.Google Scholar