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

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

1.4K
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...
1.4K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

456
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...
456
Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error00:59

Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error

632
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...
632
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

1.4K
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...
1.4K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

10.8K
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...
10.8K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

171
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
171

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

On the Impossibility of Learning the Missing Mass.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2020
Same journal

The TaMYB55-TaSnRK1α1-TabZIP9 module confers heat stress tolerance in wheat.

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

Superstatistics approach to turbulent circulation fluctuations.

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

A molecular timescale for evolution of cobamide biosynthesis.

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

Pierre Chambon, a pioneer of molecular biology and gene regulation in eukaryotes.

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

Granulosa cell glycogen fuels the avascular corpus luteum.

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

Synthetic essentiality of TRAIL/TNFSF10 in VHL-deficient renal cell carcinoma.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 30, 2025

A Knowledge Graph Approach to Elucidate the Role of Organellar Pathways in Disease via Biomedical Reports
07:35

A Knowledge Graph Approach to Elucidate the Role of Organellar Pathways in Disease via Biomedical Reports

Published on: October 13, 2023

1.6K

Errors are robustly tamed in cumulative knowledge processes.

Anna Brandenberger1, Cassandra Marcussen2, Elchanan Mossel1

  • 1Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
|January 30, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Societal knowledge can maintain integrity despite errors. Simple distributed error-checking mechanisms, even with a constant fraction of incorrect information, can eliminate all errors over time.

Keywords:
error eliminationknowledge accumulationlocal algorithmsprobabilistic models

More Related Videos

Multimodal Protocol for Assessing Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Adults with Learning Difficulties
12:55

Multimodal Protocol for Assessing Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Adults with Learning Difficulties

Published on: September 27, 2020

8.3K
Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats
08:30

Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats

Published on: February 15, 2015

20.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 30, 2025

A Knowledge Graph Approach to Elucidate the Role of Organellar Pathways in Disease via Biomedical Reports
07:35

A Knowledge Graph Approach to Elucidate the Role of Organellar Pathways in Disease via Biomedical Reports

Published on: October 13, 2023

1.6K
Multimodal Protocol for Assessing Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Adults with Learning Difficulties
12:55

Multimodal Protocol for Assessing Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Adults with Learning Difficulties

Published on: September 27, 2020

8.3K
Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats
08:30

Operant Procedures for Assessing Behavioral Flexibility in Rats

Published on: February 15, 2015

20.8K

Area of Science:

  • Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
  • Information Science
  • Complex Systems

Background:

  • Knowledge accumulation in society is distributed, leading to potential errors.
  • Erroneous knowledge can compromise future knowledge validity.
  • The integrity of collective knowledge is a critical concern.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate if simple distributed error-checking mechanisms can maintain societal knowledge integrity.
  • To analyze the effectiveness of local heuristics in error detection within knowledge networks.
  • To extend previous findings on knowledge integrity to more general accumulation models.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of generalized probabilistic models for knowledge accumulation.
  • Inclusion of multi-dependency and varied attachment mechanisms for new knowledge units.
  • Modeling of adversarial nodes and random error insertion.
  • Mathematical analysis of error propagation and elimination dynamics.

Main Results:

  • Demonstrated that simple local error-checking mechanisms are robust across diverse knowledge accumulation models.
  • Proved that errors are eventually eliminated even with a constant fraction of new incorrect derivations.
  • Showed the effectiveness of local heuristics in maintaining knowledge corpus integrity.

Conclusions:

  • Societal knowledge can maintain integrity through simple, distributed error-checking.
  • Local heuristics are sufficient to overcome errors introduced in knowledge accumulation.
  • The findings provide a robust theoretical basis for reliable knowledge networks.