Systematic Error
2008
Cited by 0
Read the abstract, see who wrote it and who cites it, and get the citation in APA, MLA, Chicago or Harvard.
About 10,000 papers for “Systematic error”
2008
Cited by 0
Mitchell H. Gail · Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online · 2014
Abstract Systematic error is defined and contrasted with random error.
Cited by 0
Marie-Amélie Forin-Wiart (757324), Pauline Hubert (757325), Pascal Sirguey (193318) et al. · Figshare · 2015
<p>Location errors from 39 GPS CatLog data loggers relative to the National Geodetic Survey coordinates obtained of (a) 700–2300 fixes per unit under antenna positions (up or down) and fix intervals (program A, program B or program C) in an open habitat and (b) 250–2300 fixes per unit under different habitats with fixed conditions. Ellipses represent 95% confidence areas and centroids represent the average location error.</p>
Cited by 0Open access
Encyclopedia of Research Design · 2010
Cited by 0
Kenneth C. Cheng (480178), Jay Pratt (368934), Brian E. Maki (480179) · Figshare · 2015
<p>Effects of recall-delay and cognitive-task on reach-to-grasp accuracy (systematic error) for each coordinate axis are shown in (A) and (B), respectively. Means and standard deviations are shown for young adults (gray) and older adults (black). Note the increased mean lateral error during the longest recall-delay trials (DT=10s) in (A), and when performing the non-spatial cognitive task in (B). * indicates a significant difference between means due to recall-delay in (A), or cognitive-task in (B) (α=0.05); whiskers indicate standard deviations. [See <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0079401#pone-0079401-g006" target="_blank">Figure 6</a> caption for note regarding presentation of data in mm].</p>
Cited by 0Open access
Henghui Zhang (159258), Yiping Wang (1484218), Songtao Ai (3753661) et al. · Figshare · 2017
<p>Standardized, simplified 3D virtual pelvic models were created using SOLIDWORKS<sup>™</sup> 2015 software (Dassault Systemes, Waltham, Massachusetts) and imported into 3D Acetabulometer as the true (predetermined) value of the 3D orientation, for comparison with the value measured with the algorithm.</p>
Cited by 0Open access
Jeffrey Glosup, M.C. Axelrod · OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 1996
The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) defines systematic error as An error which remains constant over replicative measurements. It would seem from the ANSI definition that a systematic error is not really an error at all; it is merely a failure to calibrate the measurement system properly because if error is constant why not simply correct for it? Yet systematic errors undoubtedly exist, and they differ in some fundamental way from the kind of errors we call random. Early papers by Eisenhart and by Youden discussed systematic versus random error with regard to measurements in the physical sciences, but not in a fundamental way, and the distinction remains clouded by controversy. The lack of a general agreement on definitions has led to a plethora of different and often confusing methods on how to quantify the total uncertainty of a measurement that incorporates both its systematic and random errors. Some assert that systematic error should be treated by non- statistical methods. We disagree with this approach, and we provide basic definitions based on entropy concepts, and a statistical methodology for combining errors and making statements of total measurement of uncertainty. We illustrate our methods with radiometric assay data.
Cited by 2Open access
J. G. Esler Et Al, J. G. Esler, G. J. Roelofs et al. · 2004
A quantitative analysis of grid-related systematic errors in oxidising capacity and ozone production rates in chemistry transport models
Cited by 0
2024
Citation: 'systematic examination error' in the IUPAC Compendium of Chemical Terminology, 5th ed.; International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry; 2025. Online version 5.0.0, 2025. 10.1351/goldbook.10011 • License: The IUPAC Gold Book is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike CC BY-SA 4.0 International for individual terms. Requests for commercial usage of the compendium should be directed to IUPAC.
Cited by 0
Michael D. Byrne · 2006
Abstract : Even when executing routine procedures with relatively simple devices, people make nonrandom errors. Consequences range from the trivial to the fatal, with Navy personnel often operating at the more extreme end of this range. This problem has received surprisingly little attention from cognitive psychologists. The research summarized here examines such errors in some detail both empirically and through computational cognitive modeling. There were several key results. First, many such errors are sensitive not just to the structure of the task but also to the layout of controls and displays, contrary to the predictions of most current task analysis frameworks. Some such errors seem to be mitigable by simple layout changes. Second, a particularly pervasive error (termed postcompletion error) was found to be highly resistant to cue-based mitigation, and though an effective cue was found, the requirements for such cues are difficult to meet in field contexts. Finally, cognitive computational models constructed using the ACT-R cognitive architecture suggested that certain interface manipulations (removing state information, adding additional extraneous controls) which appeared major would actually have limited impact on human task performance, and these predictions were validated empirically.
Cited by 0
Jennifer D. Kruschwitz · SPIE eBooks · 2018
Cited by 0
F. H. Seares · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 1923
Cited by 0Open access
Alexandra Vinokurova · SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología · 2020
The article discusses the process of studying the systematic errors together with elementary physics, is considered a possible point source of systematic error and evaluate it on an international scale.
Cited by 0Open access
Kristine Meise (591567), Birte Mueller (591568), Beate Zein (591569) et al. · Figshare · 2015
<p>The laser distance meter measured the distance between camera and the first contact with the animal in the periphery of the body (solid red line). Because length measurements were taken at the body centre (dashed black line), the measured distance does not equal the distance between camera and measurement point (red solid and dashed line).</p>
Cited by 0Open access
Donald C. Adams, David Markus · 2013
Instantaneous attributes are commonly used in interpretation and in quantitative prediction of reservoir properties. Quantitative use of instantaneous attributes requires that they be free of systematic error. Our goal is to highlight algorithm improvements that are necessary for their quantitative use. We focus on improvements to analytic trace calculation and to the form of the derivative used in calculation of instantaneous attributes with emphasis on how that form has affect on instantaneous frequency. Our analytic trace results show that proper treatment of the Hilbert transform is necessary to prevent spectral leakage induced errors of up to 10 % in envelope. The size of the error is dependent on trace length and distance from the ends of the trace. Our results for instantaneous frequency show that it is biased by choice of the phase derivative and calculation method leading to lower than expected frequencies and frequency aliasing. A 3-point derivative solution departs from ideal frequency response at 0.2 Nyquist while a 7-point solution departs at 0.4 Nyquist. The mitigation of these issues requires the use of a properly tapered and padded signal for calculation of the analytic trace and the use of phase derivatives with higher frequency departures from the ideal response.
Cited by 1
Bose, Der Jei Lin · IEEE Transactions on Computers · 1985
The theory and design of systematic t-unidirectional error-detecting codes are developed. Optimal systematic codes capable of detecting 2, 3, and 6 unidirectional errors using 2, 3, and 4 check bits, respectively, are given. For r ≥5 where r is the number of check bits, the systematic codes described here can detect up to 5· 2r-4 + r -4 unidirectional errors. Encoding/ decoding methods for these codes are also investigated.
Cited by 146
C. Stucchi, G. Gennari, G. Aimino et al. · Ophthalmologica · 1993
In a polycentric study, the influence of some of the most common variables capable of influencing the reliability of prekeratotomy pachymetry has been evaluated. The fluctuation in a sequence of measurements from the same point on the cornea, with the patient in different positions (orthostatic and clinostatic), during progressive drying of the lacrimal film and before and after corneal marking have been evaluated. Three operators, working randomized, used the same computerized pachymeter (DGH 1000) to make the measurements. The data obtained in this way were statistically analyzed by the Statgraphics personal computer program. Some interesting and useful considerations about the more correct methods to run the test and its real accuracy have emerged.
Cited by 8
Nikolos, Gaitanis, Philokyprou · IEEE Transactions on Computers · 1986
In this paper we give methods for the construction of systematic t-random error correcting and all unidirectional error detecting codes. Also we give the encoding/decoding algorithms and discuss their implementation.
Cited by 60
Roberta Mulford · OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2018
Factors that may affect the precision of Neutron Emission Rate (NER) measurements made in the Canberra 4 neutron counter have been examined and quantified. [1] Measurements of sample NER are corrected for the efficiency of the counter. The efficiency is calculated by measuring a source of known intensity, and taking the ratio of the measured neutrons per second (n/s) to the known output of the source.
Cited by 0Open access
Veli‐Matti Karhulahti, Tiina Auranen · 2024
This is a commentary in the British Journal of Psychiatry.
Cited by 0Open access