Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 3: Intermediate precision and alternative designs for collaborative studies (ISO 5725-3:2023, identical)
1Key Takeaways
This document presents alternative experimental approaches for determining measures that characterize measurement accuracy and precision, including repeatability and reproducibility indicators. It provides a framework for selecting indicators under varying conditions, outlines the relevant conditions under which their …
2Scope / Description
This document presents alternative experimental approaches for determining measures that characterize measurement accuracy and precision, including repeatability and reproducibility indicators. It provides a framework for selecting indicators under varying conditions, outlines the relevant conditions under which their application is necessary or beneficial, and offers guidance for interpreting and using the resulting estimates. Additionally, the document includes specific examples developed with detailed structures and calculations. Each alternative framework presented addresses one or more of the following objectives: a) discussion of the impact of definitions of reproducibility indicators under varying conditions; b) guidance on interpreting and applying reproducibility indicators under varying conditions; c) determination of repeatability, reproducibility, and reproducibility indicators under varying conditions; d) determination of improved1) repeatability and other precision indicators; e) enhancement of mean sample estimates; f) determination of the scope of within-laboratory reproducibility standard deviations; g) determination of other components of reproducibility precision, such as operator-induced variability; h) determination of the reliability of reproducibility estimates; i) reduction of the minimum number of participating laboratories through optimization of the reliability of reproducibility estimates; j) prevention of biased reproducibility estimates (using a structured approach with distributed levels); and k) prevention of biased repeatability estimates (accounting for material heterogeneity). Frequently, a method whose reproducibility is assessed within the framework of a collaborative study has been previously evaluated in a validation study conducted by a single laboratory that developed the method. The relevant factors for assessing reproducibility under varying conditions are those pre-defined during that single-laboratory validation study. 1) This allows for a reduction in the number of participating laboratories.