Response error bounds

Figure 1. Plots showing the Calibration Process. A. Response transformation to constant variance Examples showing a. too little, b. appropriate, and c. too much transformation power. B. Amount Transformation in conforming to a (linear) model. C. Construction of p. confidence bands about the regressed line, q. response error bounds and intersection of these to determine r. the estimated amount interval.

The response error bounds and the response error bandwidths for a single unknown determination are given in Tables XI and XII. These values are all much larger than the regression confidence bands because of the much smaller number of data points involved. In comparing the response error bounds (Table XI) to the... 

Table XI. Estimated Values of the Response Error Bounds from Inverse Transformed Data. a 0.025 where 95% of Response Unknowns Will Lie within the Response Error...

Since both the temperature dependence of the characteristic ratio and that of the density are known, the prediction of the scaling model for the temperature dependence of the tube diameter can be calculated using Eq. (53) the exponent a = 2.2 is known from the measurement of the -dependence. The solid line in Fig. 30 represents this prediction. The predicted temperature coefficient 0.67 + 0.1 x 10-3 K-1 differs from the measured value of 1.2 + 0.1 x 10-3 K-1. The discrepancy between the two values appears to be beyond the error bounds. Apparently, the scaling model, which covers only geometrical relations, is not in a position to simultaneously describe the dependences of the entanglement distance on the volume fraction or the flexibility. This may suggest that collective dynamic processes could also be responsible for the formation of the localization tube in addition to the purely geometric interactions. 

A. Error Bounds for the Response to a Damped Harmonic Perturbation. 85... 

We will first consider the error bounds for a spectral density broadened by a Lorentzian slit function, Eq. (15), describing the response to an exponentially damped perturbation. In this case the broadened spectrum,... 

The usefulness of spectral densities in nonequilibrium statistical mechanics, spectroscopy, and quantum mechanics is indicated in Section I. In Section II we discuss a number of known properties of spectral densities, which follow from only the form of their definitions, the equations of motion, and equilibrium properties of the system of interest. These properties, particularly the moments of spectral density, do not require an actual solution to the equations of motion, in order to be evaluated. Section III introduces methods which allow one to determine optimum error bounds for certain well-defined averages over spectral densities using only the equilibrium properties discussed in Section II. These averages have certain physical interpretations, such as the response to a damped harmonic perturbation, and the second-order perturbation energy. Finally, Section IV discusses extrapolation methods for estimating spectral densities themselves, from the equilibrium properties, combined with qualitative estimates of the way the spectral densities fall off at high frequencies. 

The updating required to produce Handbook-II has not been an easy one, and we are quite aware that there are numerous deficiencies. Many hard decisions had to be made to keep the overall length within reasonable bounds. The choice of what to put in and what to leave out was often difficult, and we have probably overlooked many important contributions that should have been included. Despite our best efforts, undoubtedly errors remain and we, the authors, take full responsibility for them. 

The linear photoresponse of metal clusters was successfully calculated for spherical [158-160, 163] as well as for spheroidal clusters [164] within the jellium model [188] using the LDA. The results are improved considerably by the use of self-interaction corrected functionals. In the context of response calculations, self-interaction effects occur at three different levels First of all, the static KS orbitals, which enter the response function, have a self-interaction error if calculated within LDA. This is because the LDA xc potential of finite systems shows an exponential rather than the correct — 1/r behaviour in the asymptotic region. As a consequence, the valence electrons of finite systems are too weakly bound and the effective (ground-state) potential does not support high-lying unoccupied states. Apart from the response function Xs, the xc kernel /xc[ o] no matter which approximation is used for it, also has a self-interaction error. This is because /ic[no] is evaluated at the unperturbed ground-state density no(r), and this density exhibits self-interaction errors if the KS orbitals were calculated in LDA. Finally the ALDA form of /,c itself carries another self-interaction error. 

Once conditions for assay and amount of charcoal are selected, they must be kept constant. If conditions are changed (e.g., larger volumes of serum assayed) the charcoal dose must be reselected. Last, as a precaution, we recommend recharacterization of these data at least once each 6 months to assure proper use. It is important to note that errors in separation of antibody-bound from free ligand are interpreted in the assay as hormone being measured in the assay tube. Such errors in separation can even show parallel dose-response curves between unknown sample and reference preparation. 

Numerical experiments (Walsh, 1993) indicate that the peak-to-peak deviation of the exit concentration can be bounded, for fairly tightly tuned controllers, by calculating the response of the exit concentration to a reagent valve exhibiting a square wave oscillation with peak-to-peak amplitude equal to the deadband error. The exit concentration variation can therefore be estimated as... 

---