Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Random and Systematic Errors

Random and Systematic Errors

Random and Systematic Errors

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...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Training humans to detect AI-generated faces.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2026

Same author

Outpatient paracentesis for Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome: STOP-OHSS feasibility study and RCT Synopsis.

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)·2026

Same author

Predictors of burnout among academic family medicine faculty: Looking back to plan forward.

PloS one·2026

Same author

Recurring marine phosphorus spikes during major palaeozoic mass extinctions and climate change.

Nature communications·2026

Same author

Views on outpatient paracentesis and GnRH antagonists for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a qualitative study of patients and healthcare professionals.

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)·2026

Same author

Removal of small fibroids and polyps in patients with infertility and recurrent miscarriage: The HELP Fertility? RCT.

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)·2026

Same journal

Invaders taking over-Mollusc faunal change in volcanic barrier lakes of the Albertine Rift biodiversity hotspot.

PloS one·2026

Same journal

AI-driven molecular diversification and ligand-based optimization of macitentan derivatives targeting VEGFR1 and endothelin signaling pathways.

PloS one·2026

Same journal

Performance patterns and records in the world aquatics masters championships: Where do the most frequently represented nations among the top-ten masters swimmers come from?

PloS one·2026

Same journal

Modeling diurnal Temperature-Rainfall relationships under multicollinearity using PLS-SEM: A case study of Ghana.

PloS one·2026

Same journal

Organizational culture, social capital, and emergency capacity in primary healthcare institutions: A cross-sectional structural equation modeling study comparing ordinary and older communities.

PloS one·2026

Same journal

Impact of kidney function on the metabolome in the general population.

PloS one·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 31, 2026

Protocol for Data Collection and Analysis Applied to Automated Facial Expression Analysis Technology and Temporal Analysis for Sensory Evaluation

Protocol for Data Collection and Analysis Applied to Automated Facial Expression Analysis Technology and Temporal Analysis for Sensory Evaluation

Published on: August 26, 2016

Error Rates in Users of Automatic Face Recognition Software.

David White¹, James D Dunn¹, Alexandra C Schmid²

¹School of Psychology, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

|October 15, 2015

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Human accuracy in face recognition systems is lower than expected, with over 50% errors in passport fraud screening. Training and selecting skilled facial examiners can significantly improve operational accuracy.

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 31, 2026

Protocol for Data Collection and Analysis Applied to Automated Facial Expression Analysis Technology and Temporal Analysis for Sensory Evaluation

Protocol for Data Collection and Analysis Applied to Automated Facial Expression Analysis Technology and Temporal Analysis for Sensory Evaluation

Published on: August 26, 2016

Area of Science:

Forensic science
Human-computer interaction
Biometrics

Background:

Automatic face recognition systems are widely deployed, showing improved algorithm performance.
Current benchmarking tests overlook human operator errors, creating a gap between evaluation and operational accuracy.

Purpose of the Study:

To measure human user performance in a real-world face recognition system used for passport identity fraud screening.
To identify factors influencing accuracy in operational face recognition tasks.

Main Methods:

Experiment 1: Assessed target detection accuracy in algorithm-generated candidate lists for passport images.
Experiment 2: Compared performance of students, trained passport officers, and experienced facial examiners.

Main Results:

Participants made over 50% errors for adult faces and over 60% for children in Experiment 1.
Student and passport officer performance was equivalent; facial examiners showed a 20% improvement.
Human performance can reduce benchmark estimates by up to 50% in operational settings.

Conclusions:

Human operator performance significantly limits the accuracy of face recognition systems in operational environments.
Recruitment, selection, training, and mentorship of human operators are crucial for enhancing system accuracy.