Linearity data, acceptability

Another approach is to prepare a stock solution of high concentration. Linearity is then demonstrated directly by dilution of the standard stock solution. This is more popular and the recommended approach. Linearity is best evaluated by visual inspection of a plot of the signals as a function of analyte concentration. Subsequently, the variable data are generally used to calculate a regression line by the least-squares method. At least five concentration levels should be used. Under normal circumstances, linearity is acceptable with a coefficient of determination (r2) of >0.997. The slope, residual sum of squares, and intercept should also be reported as required by ICH. 

Linearity data are often judged from the coefficient of determination (r ) and the y intercept of the linear regression line. An value of >0.998 is considered as evidence of acceptable fit of the data to the regression line. The y intercept should be a small percentage of the analyte target concentration, for example, <2%. While... 

Anumber of defects with manual inspection indications clarified by AUGUR 4.2 records have been accepted for further operation in 1996 with prescription of next year AUGUR 4 2 inspection. Based on two consecutive inspections (1996-97 years) comparative analysis of AUGUR 4.2 data was executed. It was shown that the flaw configurations, reproduced by AUGUR 4.2 are stable and the small differences are conditioned only by system thresholds of linear coordinate and signal amplitude as well as variations in local conditions of in-site inspection. 

It has been shown throughout this chapter that the properties of plastics are dependent on time. In Chapter 1 the dependence of properties on temperature was also highlighted. The latter is more important for plastics than it would be for metals because even modest temperature changes below 100°C can have a significant effect on properties. Clearly it is not reasonable to expect creep curves and other physical property data to be available at all temperatures. If information is available over an appropriate range of temperatures then it may be possible to attempt some type of interpolation. For example, if creep curves are available at 20°C and 60°C whereas the service temperature is 40°C then a linear interpolation would provide acceptable design data. 

This weighting procedure for the linearized Arrhenius equation depends upon the validity of Eq. (6-7) for estimating the variance of y = In k. It will be recalled that this equation is an approximation, achieved by truncating a Taylor s series expansion at the linear term. With poor precision in the data this approximation may not be acceptable. A better estimate may be obtained by truncating after the quadratic term the result is... 

It should be remembered, however, that a linear relationship between T and n is only valid within the limits of binary impact theory. Its restrictions have already been discussed in connection with Fig. 1.23, where the straight line drawn through zero corresponds to relation (3.46). The latter is acceptable within the whole region of the gas phase up to nearly the critical point. Therefore we used Eq. (3.46) to plot experimental data in Fig. 3.8. The coincidence of maxima in theoretical and experimental dependence Aa)i/2(r) is rather good, as it is achieved by choice of cross-section (3.44), which is the only fitting parameter of the theory. Moreover, within the whole range of the gas phase the experimental widths do not fall outside the narrow corridor of possible values established by the theory. The upper curve corresponds to strong collisions and the lower to the weak collision limit. As follows from (3.23), they differ by a factor... 

Figure 2.7. Using residuals to judge linearity. Horizontal lines the accepted variation of a single point, e.g., 2 resi thick dashed line perceived trend note that in the middle and near the ends there is a tendency for the residuals to be near or beyond the accepted limits, that is, the model does not fit the data (arrows). For a numerical example, see Section 4.13. The right panel shows the situation when the model was correctly chosen.

Of all the requirements that have to be fulfilled by a manufacturer, starting with responsibilities and reporting relationships, warehousing practices, service contract policies, airhandUng equipment, etc., only a few of those will be touched upon here that directly relate to the analytical laboratory. Key phrases are underlined or are in italics Acceptance Criteria, Accuracy, Baseline, Calibration, Concentration range. Control samples. Data Clean-Up, Deviation, Error propagation. Error recovery. Interference, Linearity, Noise, Numerical artifact. Precision, Recovery, Reliability, Repeatability, Reproducibility, Ruggedness, Selectivity, Specifications, System Suitability, Validation. 

The HPLC method for which data are given had previously been shown to be linear over a wide range of concentrations what was of interest here was whether acceptable linearity and accuracy would be obtained over a relatively narrow concentration range around the nominal concentration in the product the specification limits were 90-110% of nominal. Three concentrations were chosen and three repeat determinations were carried out at each. Two different samples were prepared at each concentration, namely an aqueous calibration solution and a spiked placebo. All samples were worked up according to the method and appropriate aliquots were injected. The area counts are given in the second, respectively the fifth column of Table 4.42. 

The physical meaning of the g (ion) potential depends on the accepted model of an ionic double layer. The proposed models correspond to the Gouy-Chapman diffuse layer, with or without allowance for the Stem modification and/or the penetration of small counter-ions above the plane of the ionic heads of the adsorbed large ions. " The experimental data obtained for the adsorption of dodecyl trimethylammonium bromide and sodium dodecyl sulfate strongly support the Haydon and Taylor mode According to this model, there is a considerable space between the ionic heads and the surface boundary between, for instance, water and heptane. The presence in this space of small inorganic ions forms an additional diffuse layer that partly compensates for the diffuse layer potential between the ionic heads and the bulk solution. Thus, the Eq. (31) may be considered as a linear combination of two linear functions, one of which [A% - g (dip)] crosses the zero point of the coordinates (A% and 1/A are equal to zero), and the other has an intercept on the potential axis. This, of course, implies that the orientation of the apparent dipole moments of the long-chain ions is independent of A. 

Consequently, the proof of calibration should never be limited to the presentation of a calibration graph and confirmed by the calculation of the correlation coefficient. When raw calibration data are not presented in such a situation, most often a validation study cannot be evaluated. Once again it should be noted that nonlinearity is not a problem. It is not necessary to work within the linear range only. Any other calibration function can be accepted if it is a continuous function. 

A nonlinear fit weights the initial data points more heavily and gives a better description of the decline in oxamyl residues during the critical period when the residues are a concern in the evaluation of worker safety. The nonlinear curve fitting approach has been accepted by regulatory agencies for the determination of pesticide half-life determinations in soil when the decline data do not fit a linear first-order curve. 

At this point we can summarize the steps required to implement the Gauss-Newton method for PDE models. At each iteration, given the current estimate of the parameters, ky we obtain w(t,z) and G(t,z) by solving numerically the state and sensitivity partial differential equations. Using these values we compute the model output, y(t k(i)), and the output sensitivity matrix, (5yr/5k)T for each data point i=l,...,N. Subsequently, these are used to set up matrix A and vector b. Solution of the linear equation yields Ak(jH) and hence k°M) is obtained. The bisection rule to yield an acceptable step-size at each iteration of the Gauss-Newton method should also be used. 

Case 2. For data sets that do not meet the criteria of Case 1, but contain acceptable values over a temperature range of at least two degrees, the results are smoothed using a linear function of temperature with an estimated coefficient of thermal expansion. A table of smoothed recommended values is presented. 

---