Abstract
Despite the importance of stating the measurement uncertainty in chemical analysis, concepts are still not widely applied by the broader scientific community. The Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement approves the use of both the partial derivative approach and the Monte Carlo approach. There are two limitations to the partial derivative approach. Firstly, it involves the computation of first-order derivatives of each component of the output quantity. This requires some mathematical skills and can be tedious if the mathematical model is complex. Secondly, it is not able to predict the probability distribution of the output quantity accurately if the input quantities are not normally distributed. Knowledge of the probability distribution is essential to determine the coverage interval. The Monte Carlo approach performs random sampling from probability distributions of the input quantities; hence, there is no need to compute first-order derivatives. In addition, it gives the probability density function of the output quantity as the end result, from which the coverage interval can be determined. Here we demonstrate how the Monte Carlo approach can be easily implemented to estimate measurement uncertainty using a standard spreadsheet software program such as Microsoft Excel. It is our aim to provide the analytical community with a tool to estimate measurement uncertainty using software that is already widely available and that is so simple to apply that it can even be used by students with basic computer skills and minimal mathematical knowledge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (2008) JCGM 100:2008. Evaluation of measurement data - guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement
Linsinger TPJ, Fuhrer M, Kandler W, Schuhmacher R (2001) Analyst 126(2):211–216. doi:10.1039/b008618p
Fuentes-Arderiu X (2000) Clin Chem 46(9):1437–1438
Alder L, Korth W, Patey AL, van der Schee HA, Schoeneweiss S (2001) J AOAC Int 84(5):1569–1578
King B, Lawn R (1999) Analyst 124(7):1123–1130. doi:10.1039/a900487d
Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (2008) JCGM 101:2008. Evaluation of measurement data - supplement 1 to the "Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement" - propagation of distributions using a Monte Carlo method
McCullough BD, Wilson B (1999) Comput Stat Data Anal 31(1):27–37. doi:10.1016/s0167-9473(99)00004-3
McCullough BD, Wilson B (2002) Comput Stat Data Anal 40(4):713–721
Simonoff JS (2002) Statistical analysis using Microsoft Excel. http://www.sternnyuedu/~jsimonof/classes/1305/pdf/excelregpdf
McCullough B, Heiser DA (2008) Comput Stat Data Anal 52(10):4570–4578
Gentle JE (2003) Random number generation and Monte Carlo methods. Springer, Heidelberg
Wichmann BA, Hill ID (1982) J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 31(2):188–190
McCullough BD (2008) Comput Stat Data Anal 52(10):4587–4593. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2008.03.006
Matsumoto M, Nishimura T (1998) ACM Trans Model Comput Simul 8(1):3–30. doi:10.1145/272991.272995
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
(PDF 156 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chew, G., Walczyk, T. A Monte Carlo approach for estimating measurement uncertainty using standard spreadsheet software. Anal Bioanal Chem 402, 2463–2469 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-011-5698-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-011-5698-4