Is My Error Propagation Formula Correct? - Help Needed

In summary, the conversation revolved around trying to reproduce the output of an analytical machine by manually calculating a specific formula in Excel. The error in the calculation was found to be different from what the software/machine reported, leading to a discussion on error analysis methods and the possibility of other factors influencing the results. Ultimately, it was concluded that further investigation is needed to determine the source of the discrepancy.
  • #1
dipluso
4
0
Hi,

I've been trying to reproduce the output of an analytical machine here at work by doing the calculation myself in Excel but I can't get the error to match. Perhaps I am propagating the error incorrectly...

The calculation is z = 2^(x-y)

The values are:
x = 24.96
y = 25.98
and the std. devs are:
deltax=0.265016
deltay=0.085049

I figured that the error in z should be:
delta z = z * sqrt((2*deltax/x)^2 + (2*deltay/y)^2)
which would give 0.010958

However, the software/machine reports the error as 0.07
I am not 100% sure how the software is calculating the error but it says it uses the standard deviations.

Am I making a mistake in my formula for error propagation? (I haven't done this in a while, frankly).

Any advice much appreciated.

Thanks,
-Alex
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Remember that whatever variation is present in x and y will be exponentiated by the time it appears in Z. I am not sure about your error analysis method, but I prefer to go back to basics and do a simulation:

Code:
x = 24.96;
y = 25.98;

sx = 0.265016;
sy = 0.085049;

(* this simulates a million measurements of X and Y
 by drawing from a normal distribution with the
 mean and standard deviation you have given *)

distX = RandomReal[NormalDistribution[x, sx], 1000000];
distY = RandomReal[NormalDistribution[y, sy], 1000000];

distZ = 2^(distX - distY);

StandardDeviation[distZ]

0.0978848

I get a somewhat different answer from the instrument you are reading, so either the measurements are not normally distributed (i.e. the instrument is automatically correcting for a systematic bias) or else the standard deviations are not yet representative of the true population.

I attached a bitmap graphic of the Histograms for all three variables in this simulation, although for visual clarity I reduced the size of the simulation from 1 million measurements to only 1 thousand. The main feature to notice is that the Z distribution is slightly skewed towards larger values, likely as a result of exponentiating x - y. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable about statistics can explain how to properly quantify the error in the Z distribution.
 

Attachments

  • errorProp.bmp
    135.2 KB · Views: 539
Last edited:
  • #3
Well in my opinion the error should be given by: (this is the error formula I've always been taught)

[tex]\sigma^2_z = (\frac{\partial z}{\partial x})^2\sigma^2_x + (\frac{\partial z}{\partial y})^2\sigma^2_y}[/tex]

which gives an error of 0.095135
 
  • #4
Thanks to you both.
I have to say that you both give very reasonable answers - and indeed they report similar errors. I don't know why the value reported by the machine's software is different (mine was just plain wrong). Indeed it may be that it takes so other invisible factor into account. I'll have to ask the manufacturer.
Thanks again,
-A.
 

What is error propagation?

Error propagation is the process of quantifying and predicting the uncertainties or errors in a measurement or calculation that arise from the uncertainties in the input values or parameters.

How is error propagation calculated?

Error propagation is typically calculated using equations that take into account the uncertainties in the input values or parameters and their relationships to the final result. These equations can vary depending on the specific measurement or calculation being performed.

What are the sources of error in error propagation?

There are several sources of error in error propagation, including random and systematic errors. Random errors are due to natural variations and can be reduced by repeating measurements, while systematic errors are due to flaws in the measurement equipment or technique and can be reduced by improving the experimental setup.

How can error propagation be minimized?

Error propagation can be minimized by using more precise measurement techniques, reducing the sources of error, and increasing the number of measurements taken. It is also important to properly document and report the uncertainties associated with the measurements.

Why is error propagation important in scientific research?

Error propagation is important in scientific research because it allows for a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the results obtained. It also helps researchers to determine the reliability and validity of their findings, and to identify potential areas for improvement in their experimental methods.

Similar threads

  • General Math
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
22
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
820
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top