Measurement Uncertainty in One-Of-A-Kind Event Data Analysis

Abstract

A golden standard in science is to repeat an experiment a statistically significant number of times, recording data using the same set of detectors and the same data analysis methodology. In such case experimental error includes both the range of true values generated by repetitions of the experiment, and measurement uncertainty caused by the detector. They are independent. It is a huge and too frequently used simplification, to assume that one can measure multiple repetitions of an identical experiment, resulting in identical true experimental value. Repetitions, as similar is it is experimentally achievable, have unavoidable built-in differences resulting in a range of the true values rather than in a single value. When modern, very sensitive and well calibrated measurement systems are used, this range is not negligible, and sometimes dominates over the measurement uncertainty. Range of true values depends on built-in differences in physics of the experiment. Stochastic physical processes result typically in a broader range of true values than non-stochastic processes do. Measurement uncertainty depends on a measurement method (properties of the detector not of the experiment). Modern measurement methods, including digital ones, frequently make the measurement uncertainty very small. When data from one–of –a kind experiment are analyzed, only the measurement uncertainty is reported. It provides no information about the range of true experimental values, neither about reliability of a reported data point. Reliability of a data point is in general independent from its measurement uncertainty. However, in practice reliable measurement methods frequently have high measurement uncertainty, while low reliability methods are applied to limit measurement uncertainty. Comparison of reliable data with high measurement uncertainty to not so reliable data measured with low uncertainty is discussed – in different scenarios different data analysis methods are applicable. Methods for data analysis from an experiment repeated statistically significant number of times are very well developed. They do not require a detailed expertise in physics of an experiment, nor in the properties of the measurement system used, and meaning of the reported uncertainty is well understood in any scientific community. It all changes when data from one-of-a-kind experiment is analyzed. Analyst’s expertise is required both in the physics of the experiment and in all aspects of the measurement system, all possible malfunctions. Data users must remember that only measurement uncertainty is reported from any one-of-a-kind experiment. Theory with simulations may provide estimation of expected built-in differences in the experiment, and by this of expected range of true values for a given experiment; yet measurement uncertainty can never be used in place of the range of true experimental values.