Is My Error Propagation Formula Correct? - Help Needed

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the error propagation formula used in calculating the error for the expression z = 2^(x-y). Participants explore different methods of error analysis to reconcile discrepancies between their calculations and those reported by a machine.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Alex presents a formula for error propagation and calculates an error of 0.010958, questioning its correctness due to a discrepancy with the machine's reported error of 0.07.
  • One participant suggests a simulation approach to estimate the error, resulting in a standard deviation of approximately 0.0978848, indicating potential issues with the normality of the measurements or the representativeness of the standard deviations.
  • Another participant proposes a traditional error propagation formula, yielding an error of 0.095135, which is closer to the simulated value but still different from the machine's output.
  • Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

    Participants express differing views on the correct method for error propagation, with no consensus on why the machine's reported error differs from their calculations. Multiple competing approaches and results are presented without resolution.

    Contextual Notes

    There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the distribution of measurements and the potential influence of systematic biases in the machine's calculations. The discussion does not resolve these uncertainties.

    Who May Find This Useful

    Readers interested in error propagation methods, statistical analysis, and those working with measurements in experimental physics or engineering contexts may find this discussion relevant.

dipluso
Messages
4
Reaction score
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
 
Physics news on Phys.org
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

Last edited:
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
 
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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
4K