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: Overview00:59

Uncertainty: Overview

1.1K
In analytical chemistry, we often perform repetitive measurements to detect and minimize inaccuracies caused by both determinate and indeterminate errors. Despite the cares we take, the presence of random errors means that repeated measurements almost never have exactly the same magnitude. The collective difference between these measurements - observed values - and the estimated or expected value is called uncertainty. Uncertainty is conventionally written after the estimated or expected value.
1.1K
Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals00:54

Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals

6.3K
The confidence interval is the range of values around the mean that contains the true mean. It is expressed as a probability percentage. The interpretation of a 95% confidence interval, for instance, is that the statistician is 95% confident that the true mean falls within the interval. The upper and lower limits of this range are known as confidence limits. The confidence limits for the true mean are estimated from the sample's mean, the standard deviation, and the statistical factor...
6.3K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error00:59

Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error

1.2K
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...
1.2K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

998
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...
998
Random Error01:04

Random Error

3.4K
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...
3.4K
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

96.2K
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. 
96.2K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Metadata Correction: A Decision Support System to Enhance Self-Management of Low Back Pain: Protocol for the selfBACK Project.

JMIR research protocols·2019
Same author

A Decision Support System to Enhance Self-Management of Low Back Pain: Protocol for the selfBACK Project.

JMIR research protocols·2018
Same journal

RETRACTED: Zhang et al. A Novel Framework for Reconstruction and Imaging of Target Scattering Centers via Wide-Angle Incidence in Radar Networks. <i>Sensors</i> 2025, <i>25</i>, 6802.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Enhancing Unsupervised Multi-Source Domain Adaptation for Person Re-Identification via Mixture of Experts and Graph-Based Relation.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Development of an Instrumented Glove for Palmar Pressure Assessment in Kayakers.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Development and Experimental Validation of an Autonomous IoT-Based Monitoring System for Real-Time Water Quality Assessment in the Amazon River.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Semi-Supervised Adversarial Learning Framework for Controller Area Network Bus Intrusion Detection.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Smart Optimization Method for Safety Signs in Innovative Manufacturing Environments Integrating Industrial Field IoT Sensors and Knowledge Graphs.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 10, 2025

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

8.4K

Probabilistic Deep Learning to Quantify Uncertainty in Air Quality Forecasting.

Abdulmajid Murad1, Frank Alexander Kraemer1, Kerstin Bach2

  • 1Department of Information Security and Communication Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
|December 10, 2021
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Quantifying uncertainty in air quality forecasts is crucial for trust. This study applies probabilistic deep learning methods, finding Bayesian neural networks offer reliable estimates, while scalable methods like deep ensembles also perform well.

Keywords:
air qualityaleatoric uncertaintyepistemic uncertaintyprobabilistic deep learning

More Related Videos

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 10, 2025

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

8.4K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.2K

Area of Science:

  • Environmental Science
  • Computer Science
  • Data Science

Background:

  • Data-driven air quality forecasts have improved short-term predictions.
  • Current models often lack reliable quantification of forecast uncertainty.
  • Probabilistic deep learning offers tools for uncertainty estimation, but lacks empirical application in air quality forecasting.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To apply and compare state-of-the-art uncertainty quantification techniques in air quality forecasting.
  • To evaluate the performance, reliability, and applicability of probabilistic models for air quality predictions.
  • To investigate methods for improving uncertainty quantification, including adversarial training and exploiting data correlations.

Main Methods:

  • Trained probabilistic deep learning models, including Bayesian neural networks, deep ensembles, Monte Carlo (MC) dropout, and stochastic weight averaging-Gaussian (SWAG).
  • Evaluated model performance based on empirical accuracy, reliability of confidence estimates, and practical applicability.
  • Incorporated adversarial training and leveraged temporal/spatial correlations in air quality data.

Main Results:

  • Proposed models demonstrated superior uncertainty quantification compared to previous methods in air quality forecasting.
  • Bayesian neural networks provided more reliable uncertainty estimates but posed implementation challenges.
  • Scalable methods (deep ensemble, MC dropout, SWAG) performed well with varying tradeoffs and performance metrics.

Conclusions:

  • Uncertainty estimation significantly enhances the practical impact of data-driven air quality forecasts.
  • Probabilistic models are more suitable for informed decision-making in air quality management.
  • The choice of method involves balancing reliability, scalability, and implementation complexity.