Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Errors and Mistakes in Surveying01:19

Errors and Mistakes in Surveying

Errors and mistakes in surveying refer to inaccuracies in measurements and data recording. The errors are deviations from the actual value caused by human sensory limitations, equipment flaws, or environmental effects. These errors are typically unintentional and can result from the inherent imperfections in the instruments used, atmospheric conditions, or the observer’s inability to perceive exact measurements. On the other hand, mistakes are caused by the surveyor's lack of attention,...
Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors01:17

Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors

A survey team is tasked with determining the elevation difference between points Point A and Point B, separated by uneven terrain. They use a leveling instrument and a leveling rod.Common MistakesMisreading the Rod: During a backsight reading at Point A, the instrumentman observes the rod partially obscured by tall grass. Instead of reading 1.135 m, they mistakenly record 1.735 m due to the misalignment of the crosshair with the wrong graduation. This error adds 0.600 m to all subsequent...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Optical scattering coefficient measurement of blood plasma during clot formation.

Biomedical physics & engineering express·2025
Same author

Video rate widefield sensitive polarized light microscopy by spectrally structured illumination.

Optics letters·2025
Same author

Widefield quantitative polarized light microscopy using spectrally encoded null polarimetry.

Optics letters·2024
Same author

Assessment of the efficiency of dental excavation methods using laser speckle imaging.

Lasers in medical science·2024
Same author

Swept-wavelength null polarimetry for highly sensitive birefringence laser scanning microscopy.

Optics letters·2024
Same author

Systematic errors in a swept-wavelength null polarimeter for weak linear retardance measurements.

Applied optics·2023
Same journal

Multifunctional reconfigurable terahertz metasurface based on vanadium dioxide phase transition: achieving broadband absorption and efficient polarization conversion.

Applied optics·2026
Same journal

High-Q-factor electromagnetically induced transparency utilizing quasi-bound states in the continuum in an all-dielectric terahertz metasurface.

Applied optics·2026
Same journal

Automated stitching interferometry for high-precision metrology of X-ray mirrors.

Applied optics·2026
Same journal

Experimental demonstration of an approach to designing a metal-dielectric DBR resonant cavity structure.

Applied optics·2026
Same journal

High-precision wavefront reconstruction from a single-shot interferogram using a physics-driven hybrid feature calibration network.

Applied optics·2026
Same journal

Ultra-high-Q Fano resonance based on coupled topological corner states in Kagome photonic crystals.

Applied optics·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 12, 2026

Polarization-Sensitive Two-Photon Microscopy for a Label-Free Amyloid Structural Characterization
05:54

Polarization-Sensitive Two-Photon Microscopy for a Label-Free Amyloid Structural Characterization

Published on: September 8, 2023

Systematic errors specific to a snapshot Mueller matrix polarimeter.

Matthieu Dubreuil1, Sylvain Rivet, Bernard Le Jeune

  • 1Université de Brest, Laboratoire de Spectrométrie et Optique Laser, Brest Cedex, France. matthieu.dubreuil@univ-brest.fr

Applied Optics
|April 10, 2013
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Systematic errors in snapshot Mueller matrix polarimeters are identified and addressed. Solutions for correction and stabilization are proposed and validated through experiments and simulations.

More Related Videos

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS
14:58

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS

Published on: February 17, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 12, 2026

Polarization-Sensitive Two-Photon Microscopy for a Label-Free Amyloid Structural Characterization
05:54

Polarization-Sensitive Two-Photon Microscopy for a Label-Free Amyloid Structural Characterization

Published on: September 8, 2023

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS
14:58

Quantifying X-Ray Fluorescence Data Using MAPS

Published on: February 17, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Optical Engineering
  • Polarimetry
  • Metrology

Background:

  • Snapshot Mueller matrix polarimeters offer rapid data acquisition.
  • Systematic errors can compromise measurement accuracy.
  • Understanding error origins is crucial for reliable polarimetric analysis.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate systematic errors in snapshot Mueller matrix polarimeters.
  • To propose methods for error correction and system stabilization.
  • To differentiate between setup-induced and sample-induced errors.

Main Methods:

  • Experimental data acquisition using a specific polarimeter setup.
  • Theoretical simulations for generalized error analysis.
  • Comparative analysis of experimental and simulated results.

Main Results:

  • Identified specific systematic errors and their impact on Mueller matrix measurements.
  • Validated proposed correction and stabilization techniques.
  • Distinguished between instrumental imperfections and sample-related artifacts.

Conclusions:

  • Systematic errors in snapshot Mueller matrix polarimeters can be effectively managed.
  • Proposed methods enhance the accuracy and reliability of polarimetric measurements.
  • The study provides a framework for calibrating and improving polarimetric instrumentation.