Skip to main content

The Measurement Process

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Measurement and Probability

Part of the book series: Springer Series in Measurement Science and Technology ((SSMST))

  • 1833 Accesses

Abstract

In order to measure something, we have first to construct a reference scale for the quantity of interest. This may be done, at least in principle, by selecting a subset of objects which is representative of all the possible states of the quantity and by assigning them a measure, in order to constitute a reference scale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note that the function \(m\) does not represent an empirical operation, as \(\gamma \) instead does, but rather the (mathematical) existence of a correspondence between objects and numbers, as ensured by the representation theorems that we have discussed in Chap.  3. In performing measurement , therefore, \(x\) has to be regarded as an unknown value, whilst \(\hat{x}\) is the value that we actually obtain as the result of the measurement process.

  2. 2.

    Calibration will be treated in greater detail in Chap.  11.

  3. 3.

    Note that here \(m\) denotes the “measure” function, amply discussed in Chap. 3, and not “mass”, as in the previous example.

  4. 4.

    Restitution may be sometimes very simple, as in the case of direct measurement, where it just consists in assigning to the measurand the same value of the standard that has been recognised as equivalent to it. In other cases, instead, it may be very complicated and challenging, as it happens in image-based measurement, where it involves sophisticated image processing procedures. Anyway, it is conceptually always present, since the instrument indication is, in general, a sign that needs to be interpreted for obtaining the measurement value, and restitution constitutes such an interpretation.

  5. 5.

    Calibration will be treated in some detail in Chap. 11.

  6. 6.

    This substitution may sound odd to some readers familiar with Bayesian statistics. The reason for this substitution is that \(x\) and \(x^{\prime }\) describe what happens in two distinct stages in the measurement process. Additional reasons for this distinction will appear in the next sections and in Chap. 6.

  7. 7.

    This factorisation in three distributions simply results from the application of a rule of probability calculus; see e.g. [8].

  8. 8.

    If instead, for some \(x\), \(P(y|x)=P(y)\), the indication would be, in those cases, independent from \(x\), and measurement would be thus impossible, since we would not obtain any information from the instrument.

References

  1. Mari, L.: Measurement in economics. In: Boumans, M. (ed.) Measurability, pp. 41–77. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Frigerio, A., Giordani, A., Mari, L.: Outline of a general model of measurement. Synthese 7, 123–149 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rossi, G.B.: Cross disciplinary concepts and terms in measurement. Measurement 42, 1288–1296 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Morawski, R.Z.: Unified approach to measurand reconstruction. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 43, 226–231 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rossi, G.B.: A probabilistic model for measurement processes. Measurement 34, 85–99 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cox, M.G., Rossi, G.B., Harris, P.M., Forbes, A.: A probabilistic approach to the analysis of measurement processes. Metrologia 45, 493–502 (2008)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sommer, K.D.: Modelling of Measurements, System Theory, and Uncertainty Evaluation. In: Pavese, F., Forbes, A. (eds.) Data modeling for metrology and testing in measurement science, pp. 275–298. Birkhauser-Springer, Boston (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Papoulis, A.: Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, Singapore (1984)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Thompson, J.R., Tapia, R.A.: Non parametric function estimation, modeling and simulation, SIAM, Philadelphia (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gentle, J.E.: Nonparametrical estimation of probability density functions. In: Gentle, J.E. (ed.) Computational Statistics. pp. 487–514. Springer, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni Battista Rossi .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rossi, G.B. (2014). The Measurement Process. In: Measurement and Probability. Springer Series in Measurement Science and Technology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8825-0_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics