Systematic errors in physical constants
DOI: 10.1063/1.3057731
Physicists today make very little use of statistical techniques. There was good reason for the minor role so long accorded the statistical evaluation of the errors in physical constants. When two laboratories make independent determinations, each may attach to its “best” value a ± sign followed by an estimate s of the error. This estimate of the error is often based upon a series of observations made under carefully controlled conditions. Experimenters soon discovered that if laboratories A and B reported values
References
1. P. W. Bridgman, “Critique of critical tables”, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 46, 1394 (1960).https://doi.org/PNASA6
2. H. Preston‐Thomas, L. G. Turnbull, E. Green, T. M. Dauphiness, and S. N. Kalra, “An absolute measurement of the acceleration due to gravity”, Ottawa Division of Applied Physics, National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada.
3. N. E. Dorsey, “The velocity of light”, Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. 34, 1 (1944).https://doi.org/TAPSAY
4. N. E Dorsey and C. Eisenhart, “On absolute measurements”, Sci. Monthly 77, 103 (1953).https://doi.org/KHYKD8
5. F. Yates, “Complex experiments”, Suppl. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. 2, 181 (1935).
6. H. Hotelling, “Some problems in weighing and other experimental techniques”, Ann. Math. Stat. 15, 297 (1944).https://doi.org/AASTAD
7. O. Kempthorne “The factorial approach to the weighing problem”, Ann. Math. Stat. 19, 238 (1948).https://doi.org/AASTAD
8. K. Kishen, “On the design of experiments for weighing and making other types of measurements”, Ann. Math. Stat. 16, 294 (1945).https://doi.org/AASTAD
9. A. M. Mood, “On Hotelling’s weighing problem”, Ann. Math. Stat. 17, 432 (1946).https://doi.org/AASTAD
10. R. I. Plackett and J. P. Burman, “The design of optimum multifactorial experiments”, Biometrika 33, 305 (1946).https://doi.org/BIOKAX
More about the Authors
W. J. Youden. National Bureau of Standards.