This practice can be used to determine if a constant, proportional, or linear bias correction can improve the degree of agreement between two methods that purport to measure the same property of a material.
The bias correction developed in this practice can be applied to a single result (X) obtained from one test method (method X) to obtain a predicted result ( ˆY) for the other test method (method Y).
Note 78212;Users are cautioned to ensure that ˆY is within the scope of method Y before its use.
The between methods reproducibility established by this practice can be used to construct an interval around ˆY that would contain the result of test method Y, if it were conducted, with about 95 % confidence.
This practice can be used to guide commercial agreements and product disposition decisions involving test methods that have been evaluated relative to each other in accordance with this practice.
1.1 This practice covers statistical methodology for assessing the expected agreement between two standard test methods that purport to measure the same property of a material, and deciding if a simple linear bias correction can further improve the expected agreement. It is intended for use with results collected from an interlaboratory study meeting the requirement of Practice D 6300
Note 18212;Examples of standard test methods are those developed by voluntary consensus standards bodies such as ASTM, IP/BSI, DIN, AFNOR, CGSB.
1.2 The statistical methodology is based on the premise that a bias correction will not be needed. In the absence of strong statistical evidence that a bias correction would result in better agreement between the two methods, a bias correction is not made. If a bias correction is required, then the parsimony principle is followed whereby a simple correction is to be favored over a more complex one.
Note 28212;Failure to adhere to the parsimony principle generally results in models that are over-fitted and do not perform well in practice.
1.3 The bias corrections of this practice are limited to a constant correction, proportional correction or a linear (proportional + constant) correction.
1.4 The bias-correction methods of this practice are method symmetric, in the sense that equivalent corrections are obtained regardless of which method is bias-corrected to match the other.
1.5 A methodology is presented for establishing the 95 % confidence limit (designated by this practice as the between methods reproducibility) for the difference between two results where each result is obtained by a different operator using different apparatus and each applying one of the two methods X and Y on identical material, where one of the methods has been appropriately bias-corrected in accordance with this practice.
Note 38212;In earlier versions of this standard practice, the term “cro......
Copyright ©2024 All Rights Reserved