How is the error in the gradient calculated?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the error in the gradient derived from a set of measurements of Y and X, with specified errors in each measurement. The proposed method involves using the formula for fractional errors, though concerns are raised about the distribution of errors and their implications. It is suggested that a linear least squares fit be used to estimate the slope and its error, while noting that the error in X can be considered negligible compared to that in Y. The conversation emphasizes the importance of context in error estimation and the need for clarity in measurement notation. Ultimately, the method for determining the gradient error should align with the principles of linear regression analysis.
SalfordPhysics
Messages
68
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


A series of 5 measurements of Y are recorded with increasing X. (i.e. gradient has units Y/X)
The error in measurement of Y is ±0.05
The error in measurement of X is ±0.005.
How is the error in the gradient calculated?

Homework Equations

- measurements[/B]
Y | X
0.2 | 0.23
0.3 | 0.27
0.5 | 0.31
0.6 | 0.38
0.8 | 0.42

The Attempt at a Solution


I assumed that the error in the gradient a would given by the equation.
εa = √((εY)2 + (εX)2)

I was unsure however if it was given by the addition of the individual error in each measurement.
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I really dislike questions like this. The distribution of the errors in the inputs is not stated. It seems that those who pose these questions expect you to interpret the given errors as some (unspecified but fixed) number of standard deviations in normal distributions. In practice, errors induced by reading instruments are closer to uniform distributions. That being the case, the error in Y/X will be a different distribution, and it is not clear what an answer of the form ±ε would mean.
Putting that aside, the formula you quote is for fractional errors. That is, if the actual error in Xi is εi then the fractional error is εi/Xi. Of course, this is only an approximation, and only works when εi is small compared with Xi.
 
I understand Haru's dislike, but since this is something that probably happens to many students, perhaps a few questions and comments may be useful:

The big question is: what's this about? If Sal has more context, he/she can get more and better assistance. What are you varying, what are you measuring, where do the error estimates come from ? Are they statistical or are they systematic ?

The comments:

Error estimates are usually pretty rough. 0.05 and 0.005 are testimony. There is a chance they are one half the least significant digit of some measuring instrument, in which case see Haru's comment.

Notation:
It's good practice to state errors (or rather: error estimates) to one decimal place (unless the first digit is 1, or unless there is a good reason to state more).
it's good practice to state measurement to the same number of decimal places as the estimated error. So here X, Y = 0.230, 0.20 etc. That the trailing digit is always zero is suspicious.

Experiments:
usually you vary something (the independent variable) and you measure something (the dependent variable). The varied quantity is probably measured too, like in this case. A simple plot shows the independent variable on the x-axis and the dependent variable on the y-axis. If there is a reason to expect linear behaviour you do a linear least squares analysis to find a slope and an intercept. Other theoretically expected behaviours may bring you to plot calculated values (square root, logarithm, etc.) to obtain an expected linear relationship.

Analysis: With the given information, I would do a linear least squares fit to estimate the slope and the error therein. I would be ignoring the error in X and I would feel justified to do so: it's ten times smaller than the error in Y so when things add up quadratically the one half percent wrong is much smaller than the error in the estimated errors: " √ ( 0.052 + 0.0052 ) = 0.05 "
 
I made these values and data up to custom to my actual problem.
The experiment was zeeman splitting using a CCD. The data was recorded by the program, with ΔE (Y from before) recorded to 1 decimal place and B (X from before) recorded to 2 decimal places. Gradient was automatically plotted. I want to know what the error in it is and so just need to know what method
 
Method is linear regression. Expressions are e.g. here (for error see here).
Otherwise, Excel has a Regression entry under Data | Data Analysis

What does "gradient was automatically plotted" mean ? You got a plot of the data and it showed Y = 3.0 * X - 0.5 ?
 
BvU said:
I would be ignoring the error in X : it's ten times smaller than the error in Y
... as fractions of the X and Y values respectively.
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanged mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top