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

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

113.5K
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value. 
113.5K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

1.6K
The atomic mass of an element varies due to the relative ratio of its isotopes. A sample's relative proportion of oxygen isotopes influences its average atomic mass. For instance, if we were to measure the atomic mass of oxygen from a sample, the mass would be a weighted average of the isotopic masses of oxygen in that sample. Since a single sample is not likely to perfectly reflect the true atomic mass of oxygen for all the molecules of oxygen on Earth, the mass we obtain from this...
1.6K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error00:59

Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error

2.1K
An experiment often consists of more than a single step. In this case, measurements at each step give rise to uncertainty. Because the measurements occur in successive steps, the uncertainty in one step necessarily contributes to that in the subsequent step. As we perform statistical analysis on these types of experiments, we must learn to account for the propagation of uncertainty from one step to the next. The propagation of uncertainty depends on the type of arithmetic operation performed on...
2.1K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

16.0K
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...
16.0K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

941
941
Random Error01:04

Random Error

10.1K
Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...
10.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Old advice on multivariate calibration: still in force, but not always followed. A tutorial.

Analytica chimica acta·2026
Same author

Augmented kurtosis-based projection pursuit: a novel, advanced machine learning approach for multi-omics data analysis and integration.

Nucleic acids research·2025
Same author

Hazards of using multivariate curve resolution for processing first-order spectral data. A rotational ambiguity analysis.

Analytica chimica acta·2025
Same author

How does sensor-wise N-BANDS relate to the of area of feasible solutions?

Analytica chimica acta·2025
Same author

Feasible band boundaries computation in bilinear matrix decomposition using essential data.

Analytica chimica acta·2025
Same author

Novel Data Fusion Strategy for Second-Order Data: Multivariate Curve Resolution for the Determination of Pharmaceuticals by Means of Fluorimetric Measurements.

Analytical chemistry·2025
Same journal

Smartphone-assisted fluorescence and colorimetric dual-mode sensor for visual quantitative detection of nitrite and nitrate in real samples.

Analytica chimica acta·2026
Same journal

Folding integrated all-paper photoelectrochemical immunoassay using annealed ZnO for point-of-care detection of ferritin.

Analytica chimica acta·2026
Same journal

Dual-mode electrochemical-SERS detection of chloramphenicol based on dual-signal enhancement.

Analytica chimica acta·2026
Same journal

Multi-screening of beta-lactam antibiotics in milk based on Fe<sub>3</sub>O<sub>4</sub>@phage/bacteria system and aggregation induced emission luminogen.

Analytica chimica acta·2026
Same journal

A porous phosphate-rich β-cyclodextrin polymer for efficient and broad-spectrum enrichment of antibiotics.

Analytica chimica acta·2026
Same journal

Corrigendum to "LUMIN: A novel algorithm for automated mixture quantification using 1D <sup>1</sup>H NMR spectra" [Analytica Chimica Acta 1411 (2026) 345639].

Analytica chimica acta·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 28, 2026

Split Point Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification of Thermal-Optical Organic/Elemental Carbon Measurements
10:22

Split Point Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification of Thermal-Optical Organic/Elemental Carbon Measurements

Published on: September 7, 2019

8.9K

Generalized error-dependent prediction uncertainty in multivariate calibration.

Franco Allegrini1, Peter D Wentzell2, Alejandro C Olivieri1

  • 1Departamento de Química Analítica, Facultad de Ciencias Bioquímicas y Farmacéuticas, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Instituto de Química de Rosario (IQUIR-CONICET), Suipacha 531, Rosario S2002LRK, Argentina.

Analytica Chimica Acta
|December 29, 2015
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study analyzes how non-independent measurement errors affect multivariate calibration. New formulas for prediction errors account for correlated and heteroscedastic noise, improving accuracy in real-world data analysis.

Keywords:
Correlated errorsError propagationHeteroscedastic errorsMeasurement noiseMultivariate calibrationPrediction errors

More Related Videos

Basics of Multivariate Analysis in Neuroimaging Data
06:35

Basics of Multivariate Analysis in Neuroimaging Data

Published on: July 24, 2010

17.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 28, 2026

Split Point Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification of Thermal-Optical Organic/Elemental Carbon Measurements
10:22

Split Point Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification of Thermal-Optical Organic/Elemental Carbon Measurements

Published on: September 7, 2019

8.9K
Basics of Multivariate Analysis in Neuroimaging Data
06:35

Basics of Multivariate Analysis in Neuroimaging Data

Published on: July 24, 2010

17.4K

Area of Science:

  • Analytical Chemistry
  • Chemometrics
  • Instrumental Analysis

Background:

  • Multivariate calibration often assumes independent and identically distributed (iid) measurement errors.
  • Real-world data frequently exhibit correlated and/or heteroscedastic noise due to external factors.
  • Existing figures of merit may be inaccurate when the iid assumption is violated.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of deviations from the iid error assumption on multivariate calibration.
  • To develop new expressions for calculating sample-dependent prediction standard errors.
  • To quantitatively assess the influence of instrumental error sources.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis within the framework of error propagation theory.
  • Derivation of new prediction standard error expressions for non-iid error scenarios.
  • Validation using both simulated and experimental data.

Main Results:

  • Significant differences in prediction error estimation were observed across different noise structures.
  • The derived expressions provide a more accurate assessment of prediction errors under non-iid conditions.
  • The study highlights the limitations of classical iid-based figures of merit.

Conclusions:

  • Deviations from iid error assumptions significantly impact multivariate calibration results.
  • The new error propagation-based methods offer improved accuracy for prediction error estimation.
  • Accurate error modeling is crucial for reliable multivariate data analysis.