Problem with statistical sampling error

Statistical prediction errors for a sample that are quite different than the other validation samples indicate a problem with that sample. 

Measurement Residual Plot The statistical prediction errors indicate which samples have large spectral residuals. It can be instructive to then plot the residuals to diagnose the problem. In practice, only samples with large statistical prediction errors are examined, but all four will be plotted here. Tlte residuals for unknowns 1-4 are shown in Figures 5.20-5.23, respectively. Also shown are the measured and predicted responses. The residual for unknown 1 in Figure 5.20 resembles the model validation residuals shown in Figure 5.18. 

The accuracy of a measurement is a parameter used to determine just how close the determined value is to the true value for the test specimens. One problem with experimental science is that the true value is often not known. For example, the concentration of lead in the Humber Estuary is not a constant value and will vary depending upon the time of year and the sites from which the test specimens s are taken. Therefore, the true value can only be estimated, and of course will also contain measurement and sampling errors. The formal definition of accuracy is the difference between the experimentally determined mean of a set of test specimens, x, and the value that is accepted as the true or correct value for that measured analyte, /i0. The difference is known statistically as the error (e) of x, so we can write a simple equation for the error ... 

The reason for introducing CVEs for ), E, dF /dX, and dF /dX is simply the efficiency. The problem with the corresponding TEs is that their statistical error o-gtat increases with the number of slices P. If Mis the number of PIMC samples (or, roughly... 

Finally, it may be difficult to sample all the relevant conformations of the system with fixed. This problem is more subtle, but potentially more serious, as illustrated by Fig. 4.2. Several distinct pathways may exist between A and B. It is usually relatively easy for the molecule to enter one pathway or the other while the system is close to A or B. However, in the middle of the pathway, it may be very difficult to switch to another pathway. This means that, if we start a simulation with fixed inside one of the pathway, it is very unlikely that the system will ever cross to explore conformations associated with another pathway. Even if it does, this procedure will likely lead to large statistical errors as the rate-limiting process becomes the transition rate between pathways inside the set = constant. 

An approach that does not suffer from such problems is the ABF method. This method is based on computing the mean force on and then removing this force in order to improve sampling. This leads to uniform sampling along . The dynamics of corresponds to a random walk with zero mean force. Only the fluctuating part of the instantaneous force on remains. This method is quite simple to implement and leads to a very small statistical error and excellent convergence. 

One common characteristic of many advanced scientific techniques, as indicated in Table 2, is that they are applied at the measurement frontier, where the net signal (S) is comparable to the residual background or blank (B) effect. The problem is compounded because (a) one or a few measurements are generally relied upon to estimate the blank—especially when samples are costly or difficult to obtain, and (b) the uncertainty associated with the observed blank is assumed normal and random and calculated either from counting statistics or replication with just a few degrees of freedom. (The disastrous consequences which may follow such naive faith in the stability of the blank are nowhere better illustrated than in trace chemical analysis, where S B is often the rule [10].) For radioactivity (or mass spectrometric) counting techniques it can be shown that the smallest detectable non-Poisson random error component is approximately 6, where ... 

We have seen that Lagrangian PDF methods allow us to express our closures in terms of SDEs for notional particles. Nevertheless, as discussed in detail in Chapter 7, these SDEs must be simulated numerically and are non-linear and coupled to the mean fields through the model coefficients. The numerical methods used to simulate the SDEs are statistical in nature (i.e., Monte-Carlo simulations). The results will thus be subject to statistical error, the magnitude of which depends on the sample size, and deterministic error or bias (Xu and Pope 1999). The purpose of this section is to present a brief introduction to the problem of particle-field estimation. A more detailed description of the statistical error and bias associated with particular simulation codes is presented in Chapter 7. 

A control is a standard solution of the analyte prepared independently, often by other laboratory personnel, for the purpose of cross-checking the analyst s work. If the concentration found for such a solution agrees with the concentration it is known to have (within acceptable limits based on statistics), then this increases the confidence a laboratory has in the answers found for the real samples. If, however, the answer found differs significantly from the concentration it is known to have, then this signals a problem that would not have otherwise been detected. The analyst then knows to scrutinize his or her work for the purpose of discovering an error. 

In order to study the origin of the deviations observed, we first consider the statistical convergence of the QCL data. As a representative example. Fig. 14 shows the absolute error of the adiabatic population as a function of the number of iterations N—that is, the number of initially starting random walkers. The data clearly reveal the well-known 1/Vn convergence expected for Monte Carlo sampling. We also note the occurrence of the sign problem mentioned above. It manifests itself in the fact that the number of iterations increases almost exponentially with propagation time While at time t = 10 fs only 200 iterations are sufficient to obtain an accuracy of 2%, one needs N = 10 000 at t = 50 fs. 

In the calibration problem two related quantities, X and Y, are investigated where Y, the response variable, is relatively easy to measure while X, the amount or concentration variable, is relatively difficult to measure in terms of cost or effort Furthermore, the measurement error for X is small compared with that of Y The experimenter observes a calibration set of N pairs of values (x, y ), i l,...,N, of the quantities X and Y, x being the known standard amount or concentration values and y the chromatographic response from the known standard The calibration graph is determined from this set of calibration samples using regression techniques Additional values of the dependent variable Y, say y., j l,, M, where M is arbitrary, are also observed whose corresponding X values, x. are the unknown quantities of interest The statistical literature on the calibration problem considers the estimation of these unknown values, x, from the observed and the... 

---