Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Error Distributions and Other Statistics PDF
Error Distributions and Other Statistics PDF
Introduction
This monograph was developed in response to customer inquiries concerning the expressions used to represent the
standard deviations (standard uncertainties) of the various error probability distributions employed in ISG software
and elsewhere. The following develops these standard deviations, showing in detail the steps involved. For each
distribution, the steps may vary, but the basic procedure is to first develop an expression for the distribution variance
σ2, from which the standard deviation σ follows immediately.
The pdf
The pdf for a normally distributed random variable ε with mean 0 and standard deviation σ is given by
1
f (ε ) = e −ε /2σ .
2 2
(3)
2πσ
The variance σ2 is the square of the standard deviation.
f(ε)
ε
-L 0 L
Figure 1. The Normal Distribution. Shown is a case where the error distribution mean value is
zero. The limits ±L are approximate 95% confidence limits.
1
Much of the material in this monograph is taken from Castrup, H., “Selecting and Applying Error Distributions in Uncertainty
Analysis,” presented at the Measurement Science Conference, Anaheim, 2004.
Error Distributions and Other Statistics
An additional consideration applies to the distribution we should assume for a total error or deviation that is
composed of constituent errors or deviations. There is a theorem called the central limit theorem that demonstrates
that, even though the individual constituent errors or deviations may not be normally distributed, the combined error
or deviation is approximately so.
An argument has been presented against the use of the normal distribution in cases where the variable of interest is
restricted, i.e., where values of the variable are said to be bound by finite physical limits. This condition
notwithstanding, the normal distribution is still widely applicable in that, for many such cases, the physical limits are
located far from the population mean.
Ease of Use
Applying the uniform distribution makes it easy to obtain an uncertainty estimate. If the limits ±a of the distribution
are known, the uncertainty estimate is computed using Eq. (6).
It should be said that the "ease of use" advantage should be tempered by the following warning:2
At our present level of analytical development,3 the ease of use advantage is more difficult to justify than previously.
Given the emergence of new methods and tools, the only “excuse” for not using a physically realistic distribution,
applying a containment probability and estimating the degrees of freedom (if appropriate) is that the information for
doing so is either (1) not at our fingertips or (2) it puts too much of a strain on technicians that are not trained in
estimating uncertainty.4
GUM Authority
It has been asserted by some that the use of the uniform distribution is (uniformly?) recommended in the GUM.5
This is not true. In fact, most of the methodology of the GUM is based on the assumption that the underlying error
distribution is normal.
2
Quoted from Section 4.3.7 of the GUM.
3
Castrup, S., “A Comprehensive Comparison of Uncertainty Analysis Tools,” Proc. Measurement Science Conference, January
2004, Anaheim.
4
Since the goal of ensuring accurate measurements often involves the investment of considerable management and engineering
time, equipment acquisition expenditures and proficiency training costs, it seems curious that, just when we get to the payoff, we
become lazy and sloppy.
5
ANSI/NCSL Z540-2, U.S. Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, 1st Ed., 1997, Boulder.
Another source of confusion is that some of the examples in the GUM apply the uniform distribution in situations
that appear to be incompatible with its use. It is reasonable to suppose that much of this is due to the fact that
rigorous Type B estimation methods and tools were not available at the time the GUM was published, and the
uniform distribution was an "easy out." As stated above, the lack of such methods and tools has since been rectified.
For clarification on this issue, the reader is referred to Section 4.3 of the GUM.
The second type of uniform distribution describes errors that are distributed between the limits 0 and a. This
distribution is classified as a “truncation” distribution.6 It is shown in Figure 3.
The pdfs
Round-off Distribution
The round-off uniform distribution is defined by the probability density function
⎧1
⎪ , −a ≤ ε ≤ a
f (ε ) = ⎨ 2a (4)
⎪⎩ 0, otherwise .
Truncation Distribution
The truncation uniform distribution is defined by the probability density function
⎧1
⎪ , 0≤ε ≤ a
f (ε ) = ⎨ a (5)
⎪⎩ 0, otherwise .
The Variances
Round-off Distribution
By Eqs. (2) and (4), the variance is given by
a
σ2 = ∫
−a
f (ε )ε 2 d ε
a
1
2a −∫a
= ε 2dε
1 ε 3 a a2
= = .
2a 3 − a 3
f (ε)
ε
−a 0 a
Figure 2. The Round-off Uniform Distribution. Shown is the pdf for a uniformly distributed
random variable ε with mean zero and bounding limits ±a.
6
To the best of the author’s knowledge, this distribution was first proposed in June 2008 by Paul Reese of Wyle Laboratories.
f(ε)
ε
0 a
Figure 3. The Truncation Uniform Distribution. Shown is the pdf for a random variable ε
uniformly distributed between 0 and a.
Truncation Distribution
By Eqs. (2) and (5), the variance is given by
a
σ 2 = ∫ f (ε )ε 2 d ε
0
a
1 2
a ∫0
= ε dε
1 ε 3 a a2
= = .
a 3 0 3
The triangular distribution is also found in cases where two uniformly distributed errors with the same mean and
bounding limits are combined linearly.
The pdf
The pdf for the distribution is
⎧( a + ε ) / a 2 , − a ≤ ε ≤ 0
⎪
f (ε ) = ⎨( a − ε ) / a 2 , 0 ≤ ε ≤ a (8)
⎪ 0, otherwise.
⎩
f(ε)
ε
-a 0 a
Figure 4. The Triangular Distribution. Shown is the pdf for a random variable ε with mean zero
and bounding limits ±a.
The Variance
By Eqs. (2) and (8), the variance is given by
a
σ2 = ∫
−a
f (ε )ε 2 d ε
0 a
1 1
= ∫ (a + ε )ε dε +
a 2 ∫0
( a − ε )ε 2 d ε
2
a2 −a
a
2
a 2 ∫0
= ( a − ε )ε 2 d ε
a
2 ⎛ ε3 ε4 ⎞
= ⎜a − ⎟
a2 ⎝ 3 4 ⎠0
a2
= 2a 2 (1/ 3 − 1/ 4) = .
6
Apart from these cases, the triangular distribution has limited applicability to physical errors or deviations. Like the
uniform distribution, it displays abrupt transitions at the bounding limits and at the zero point, behaviors which are
physically unrealistic for measurement errors. In addition, the linear slopes of the pdf are somewhat fanciful.
Other distributions, such as the quadratic, cosine and half-cosine, are available that are as easy to specify and use as
the uniform or triangular and have none of their drawbacks.
The pdf
This distribution is defined by the pdf shown in Figure 5
⎧ 3
⎪ ⎡1 − (ε / a ) ⎤⎦
2
f (ε ) = ⎨ 4a ⎣ , −a ≤ε ≤ a . (11)
⎪⎩ 0 , otherwise
f(ε)
ε
-a 0 a
Figure 5. The Quadratic Distribution. Exhibits a central tendency without discontinuities and
does not assume linear pdf behavior.
The Variance
By Eq. (2),
a
3
4a −∫a ⎣
σ2 = ⎡1 − (ε / a ) 2 ⎤⎦ ε 2 d ε
3 ⎛ε3 ε5 ⎞ a
= ⎜ − ⎟
4a ⎝ 3 5a 2 ⎠ − a
3a 2 ⎛ 1 1 ⎞ a 2
= ⎜ − ⎟= .
2 ⎝ 3 5⎠ 5
The pdf
The pdf for this distribution is given by
⎧1 ⎡ ⎛ πε ⎞ ⎤
⎪ 1 + cos ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
f (ε ) = ⎨ 2a ⎣⎢ ⎝ a ⎠⎦ , − a ≤ ε ≤ a . (14)
⎪0 , otherwise
⎩
f (ε)
ε
-a 0 a
Figure 6. The Cosine Distribution. A 100% containment distribution with a central tendency and
lacking discontinuities.
The Variance
Substituting Eq. (14) in Eq. (2) yields
1 ⎡ ⎛ πε ⎞ ⎤
a
2a −∫a ⎢⎣
σ2 = 1 + cos ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ ε 2 d ε
⎝ a ⎠⎦
1 ⎡ε 3 a ⎛ πε ⎞ ⎤
a
= ⎢ + ∫ ε 2 cos ⎜ ⎟ d ε ⎥
2a ⎣ 3 − a − a ⎝ a ⎠ ⎦
π
a2 a2
= + 3 ∫ζ cos ζ d ζ
2
3 2π −π
a2 a2 π
= + 3 ⎡⎣ 2ζ cos ζ + (ζ 2 − 2) sin ζ ⎤⎦
3 2π −π
a 2 2a 2 a 2 ⎛ 6 ⎞
= − = ⎜1 − ⎟.
3 π2 3 ⎝ π2 ⎠
a 6
σ= 1− 2 . (15)
3 π
The pdf
The pdf is given by
⎧π ⎛ πε ⎞
⎪ cos ⎜ ⎟
f (ε ) = ⎨ 4a ⎝ 2a ⎠ , a ≤ ε ≤ a . (16)
⎪0 , otherwise
⎩
f (ε)
ε
-a 0 a
Figure 7. The Half-Cosine Distribution. Possesses a central tendency but exhibits a higher
probability of occurrence near the minimum limiting values than either the cosine or the normal
distribution.
The Variance
Using Eq. (16) in Eq. (2) gives
π a
⎛ πε ⎞
4a ∫
σ2 = cos ⎜ ⎟ ε 2
dε
⎝ 2a ⎠
−a
π /2
2a 2
=
π2 − /2
∫
π
ζ 2 cos ζ d ζ
2a 2 π /2
= ⎡⎣ 2ζ cos ζ + (ζ 2 − 2) sin ζ ⎤⎦
π 2
−π / 2
2a 2 ⎛ π 2 ⎞ ⎛ 8 ⎞
= 2 ⎜
− 4 ⎟ = a 2 ⎜1 − 2 ⎟.
π ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ π ⎠
8
σ = a 1− . (17)
π2
Since the half-cosine distribution is continuous both throughout its range and at the bounding limits, it is more
physically palatable than the uniform, triangular or quadratic distributions,.
The U Distribution
The following is a derivation of the U or “U-Shaped” distribution, shown in Figure 8, The U distribution is useful
for specifying sinusoidal phase-varying subject parameters.
f (ε)
ε
-a 0 a
Figure 8. The U Distribution. The distribution is the pdf for sine waves of random phase incident
on a plane.
The pdf
Preliminaries
The U distribution indicates the probability of sampling a particular sine wave amplitude from a signal whose phase
is uniformly distributed. The relevant expressions are
ε = a sin ϕ ,
Change of Variable
The pdf for ε can be obtained by using the change of variable technique:
dϕ
f (ε ) = h(ε (ϕ )) ,
dε
which yields
⎧ 1
⎪ , −a < x < a
f (ε ) = ⎨ π a 2 − ε 2 (19)
⎪
⎩ 0, otherwise.
The Variance
Substituting Eq. (19) in Eq. (2) gives
1
a
ε2
σ2 =
π ∫
−a a2 − ε 2
dε
1 ⎛ ε a2 − ε 2 a2 ⎞ a
= ⎜− + sin −1 (ε / a ) ⎟
π ⎜⎝ 2 2 ⎟ −a
⎠
2 2
1a a
= π= .
π 2 2
The Standard Deviation
The standard deviation is the square root of the variance:
a
σ= . (20)
2
7
For a more complete discussion see the article "The Lognormal Distribution," at www.isgmax.com.
the nominal or mode value to skew the error pdf in such a way that the normal distribution is not applicable.
-L1 f(ε) L2
ε
q 0
Figure 9. The Lognormal Distribution. Useful for describing distributions for parameters
constrained by a physical limit or possessing asymmetric tolerances. The case shown is a “right-
handed” distribution in which the mode value (zero) is greater than the physical limit q.
The pdf
The pdf for a lognormally distributed error ε is given by
1 ⎧⎪ ⎡ ⎛ ε − q ⎞ ⎤ 2 ⎫⎪
f (ε ) = exp ⎨ − ⎢ ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2λ 2 ⎬ , (22)
2π λ ε − q m − q ⎠⎦
⎩⎪ ⎣ ⎝ ⎭⎪
where q is a physical limit for ε, m is the distribution median and λ is referred to as the "shape parameter." Figure 9
shows an example of a “right-handed” lognormal for which q < 0.
1
∞ ⎧⎪ ⎡ ⎛ ε − q ⎞ ⎤ 2 ⎫⎪ ε
〈ε 〉 = ∫ exp ⎨ − ⎢ ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2λ 2 ⎬ dε
2π λ q ⎪⎩ ⎣ ⎝ m − q ⎠ ⎦ ⎪⎭ (ε − q)
1 ∞ ⎧ [ln (ζ )]2 ⎫ dζ
⎪ ⎪
〈ε 〉 = ∫ exp ⎨ − ⎬ [ q + ( m − q)ζ ]
2π λ 0 ⎪⎩ 2λ 2 ⎪⎭ ζ (23)
=I +I ,
1 2
where
⎪⎧ [ln (ζ )] ⎪⎫ dζ
∞ 2
q
2π λ ∫0
I1 = exp ⎨ − ⎬
⎩⎪ 2λ 2 ⎭⎪ ζ
=q
and
µ −q ∞ ⎪⎧ ( ln ζ ) ⎫⎪
2
I2 = ∫
2π λ 0
exp ⎨ −
2λ 2 ⎭⎪
⎬ dζ
⎩⎪
= ( m − q )e λ
2
/2
.
〈ε 〉 = q + ( m − q ) e λ
2
/2
. (24)
Variance
The variance is given by
∞
σ 2 = ∫ (ε − 〈ε 〉 ) f (ε )d ε
2
q
∞
= ∫ ε 2 f (ε )d ε − 〈ε 〉 2 (25)
q
= 〈ε 2 〉 − 〈ε 〉 2 .
From Eq. (23), we have
〈ε 〉 2 = q 2 + 2 q ( m − q ) e λ + (m − q)2 eλ
2 2
/2
(26)
= [ q + ( m − q)e λ /2 ]2 .
2
1
∞ ⎧⎪ ⎡ ⎛ ε − q ⎞ ⎤ 2 ⎫⎪ ε 2
〈ε 2 〉 = ∫ exp ⎨ − ⎢ ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2λ 2 ⎬ dε . (27)
2π λ q ⎪⎩ ⎣ ⎝ m − q ⎠ ⎦ ⎪⎭ ε − q
1
∞ ⎧⎪ ( ln ζ )2 ⎫⎪ 2 dζ
2π λ ∫0
〈ε 2 〉 = exp ⎨− 2 ⎬
[ q + 2q( m − q)ζ + ( m − q) 2 ζ 2 ]
⎩⎪ 2 λ ⎭⎪ ζ (28)
= I3 + I 4 + I5 ,
where
q2
∞ ⎧⎪ ⎡ ln (ζ )⎤ 2 ⎫⎪ dζ
⎣ ⎦
I3 = ∫ exp ⎨−
σ
⎬
2π λ 0 ⎪⎭ ζ
2
⎪⎩ 2 (29)
= q2 ,
2 q( m − q )
∞ ⎧⎪ ⎡ ln (ζ )⎤ 2 ⎫⎪
exp ⎨ − ⎣ ⎦ dζ
2π λ ∫0
I4 = ⎬
2 λ 2
⎩⎪ ⎭⎪
∞
2 q( m − q )
= ∫ e −ξ /2 e λξ dξ
2
(30)
2π −∞
= 2q(m − q)e λ /2 ,
2
and
(m − q)2
∞ ⎧⎪ ( ln ζ )2 ⎫⎪
2π λ ∫0
I5 = exp ⎨− 2 ⎬
ζ dζ
⎪⎩ 2λ ⎪⎭
∞
(m − q)2
∫e dξ
−ξ 2 /2 2 λξ
= e (31)
2π −∞
= (m − q)2 e2 λ .
2
〈ε 2 〉 = q 2 + 2 q ( m − q ) e λ + (m − q)2 e2 λ
2 2
/2
(32)
= [ q + ( m − q)e λ /2 ]2 + ( m − q) 2 e λ ( eλ − 1).
2 2 2
Standard Deviation
The standard deviation is just the square root of the variance:
σ = ( m − q )e λ eλ − 1 .
2 /2 2
(34)
Other Statistics
In general, for a lognormally distributed error, we have the following relations:
Mode 0
q + m ( µ − q )e λ
2
/2
Mean
m = q + ( µ − q )e λ
2
Median
( m − q) 2 e λ ( e λ − 1)
2 2
Variance
| m − q | eλ eλ − 1
2 2
Standard Deviation /2
The quantities m, q and λ are obtained by numerical iteration, given containment limits and containment
probabilities. To date, the only known published analytical metrology applications that perform this process are
UncertaintyAnalyzer,8 AccuracyRatio.9
f(ε)
-(b-a) b-a
ε
-(b+a) 0 b+a
Figure 10. Trapezoidal Distribution. Shown is a distribution for the sum of two uniformly
distributed variables with bounding values a = 3 and b = 4. The 100% containment limits are ± b
and the uniform density limits are ±a.
follows a trapezoidal distribution with discontinuities at ±(b – a) and ±(b + a), as shown in Figure 10.
The pdf
Working with the pdf can be facilitated by making the transformations
c=b–a (35)
and
d = b + a. (36)
Then the pdf is given by
⎧ 1
⎪ d 2 − c 2 (d + ε ) , −d ≤ ε ≤ −c
⎪
⎪⎪
1
, −c ≤ ε ≤ c
f (ε ) = ⎨ d +c (37)
⎪ 1
⎪ 2 2 (d − ε ) , c ≤ε ≤d
⎪d − c
⎪⎩ 0. otherwise
The Variance
Averaging ε2 over the bounding limits of this distribution yields the variance
8
UncertaintyAnalyzer 3.0, © 2005-2008, Integrated Sciences Group, All Rights Reserved.
9
AccuracyRatio 1.6, © 2004-2008, Integrated Sciences Group, All Rights Reserved.
−c c d
1 1 1
σ2 = ∫ ε ( d + ε )d ε + ∫ ε 2 d ε + 2 2 ∫ ε 2 ( d − ε )d ε
2
d − c2
2
−d
d + c −c d −c c
d c
2 2
2 ∫
d + c ∫0
= 2 ε 2 ( d − ε )d ε + ε 2dε
d −c c
(38)
2 ⎡1 1 4 4 ⎤ 2 c3
= 2 d ( d 3
− c 3
) − ( d − c ) +
d − c 2 ⎣⎢ 3 4 ⎦⎥ 3 d + c
d 4 − c4 d 2 + c2
= = .
6( c − c )
2 2
6
Substituting from Eqs. (35) and (36) in Eq. (38) gives
(b + a ) 2 + (b − a ) 2
σ2 =
6
(39)
a 2 + b2
= .
3
a 2 + b2
σ= . (40)
3
Given these considerations, we might be more inclined to use the quadratic, cosine, half-cosine or utility distribution
(see below) on the grounds that each exhibits a more physically realistic character. Another contrary point in its
disfavor is that the construction of the trapezoidal distribution requires not only the specification of 100%
containment limits but uniform density limits as well. In the author’s experience, obtaining the limits of the
trapezoidal distribution from technical expertise has not been a fruitful exercise.
The pdf
The pdf for the utility distribution shown in Figure 11 is
10
Castrup, H., “Calibration Requirements Analysis System,” Proc. NCSL Workshop & Symposium, Denver, July 9-13, 1989.
⎧ 1
⎪ , | ε |≤ a
a+b
⎪
⎪ 1 ⎡ π (| ε | − a ) ⎤
f (ε ) = ⎨ cos2 ⎢ ⎥ , a ≤| ε |≤ b (41)
⎪a + b ⎣ 2(b − a ) ⎦
⎪ 0, | ε |≥ b .
⎪
⎩
f (ε)
ε
-b -a a b
Figure 11. The Utility Distribution. The probability of occurrence is approximately uniform
between the values ±a, tapering off to zero at the limits ±b.
The Variance
Integrating ε2 over the bounding limits of this distribution yields the variance
−a a b
⎡ π (ε + a ) ⎤ 2 2 ⎡ π (ε − a ) ⎤ 2
∫ ∫ ∫
1 1 1
σ2 = cos2 ⎢ ⎥ ε d ε + a + b ε d ε + a + b cos ⎢ 2(b − a ) ⎥ ε d ε
2
a+b ⎣ 2( b − a ) ⎦ ⎣ ⎦
−b −a a
b a
⎡ π (ε − a ) ⎤ 2
∫ ∫
2 2
= cos2 ⎢ ⎥ ε dε + a + b ε dε
2
a+b ⎣ 2( b − a ) ⎦
a 0
π /2 2
4(b − a ) ⎡2 ⎤ 2a 3
=
π ( a + b) ∫
0
cos2 ζ ⎢ (b − a )ζ + a ⎥ dζ +
⎣π ⎦ 3( a + b)
(42)
π /2
4(b − a ) ⎡ 4 ⎤
3
∫ ⎢⎣ π
4 2a
= (b − a ) 2 ζ 2 + a (b − a )ζ + a 2 ⎥ cos2 ζ dζ +
π ( a + b) 2
π ⎦ 3( a + b)
0
2a 3
= I1 + I 2 + I 3 + ,
3( a + b)
where
π /2
16(b − a )3
I1 = ∫ζ cos2 ζ dζ
2
π 3 ( a + b) 0
π /2
16(b − a ) 3 ⎛ζ 3 1 2 1 1 ⎞
= 3 ⎜⎜ + ζ sin 2ζ − sin 2ζ + ζ cos 2ζ ⎟⎟ (43)
π ( a + b) ⎝ 6 4 8 4 ⎠0
2(b − a )3 ⎛ π 2 ⎞
= ⎜⎜ − 1⎟ ,
π ( a + b) ⎝
2
6 ⎟
⎠
π /2
4(b − a ) 4
I2 = a (b − a ) ∫ ζ cos ζ dζ
2
π ( a + b) π
0
2 π /2
16a (b − a )
= ∫ ζ cos ζ dζ
2
π 2 ( a + b) 0 (44)
π /2
16a (b − a ) 2 ⎛ζ 2
ζ sin 2ζ cos 2ζ ⎞
= ⎜⎜ + + ⎟⎟
π 2 ( a + b) ⎝ 4 4 8 ⎠0
=
a (b − a )2 2
π 2 ( a + b)
(
π −4 , )
and
π /2
4a 2 ( b − a )
I3 = ∫ cos ζ dζ
2
π ( a + b)
0
π /2
4a (b − a ) ⎛ ζ sin 2ζ ⎞
2
= +
π ( a + b) ⎜⎝ 2 4 ⎟⎠0
(45)
a 2 (b − a )
= .
a+b
Substituting Eqs. (43) – (45) in Eq. (42) gives
2a 3
σ 2 = I1 + I 2 + I 3 +
3( a + b)
2(b − a )3 ⎛ π 2 ⎞ a (b − a )2 2
= ⎜
π 2 ( a + b) ⎜⎝ 6
− 1 ⎟ +
⎟ π 2 ( a + b)
π − 4 +(a 2 (b − a )
a+b
+ )
2a 3
3( a + b)
⎠
1 ⎡ ⎛1 1 ⎞ 2⎛ 4 ⎞ 2 1 3⎤
= 2(b − a )3 ⎜ − 2 ⎟ + a (b − a ) ⎜ 1 − 2 ⎟+a b− 3a ⎥
a + b ⎢⎣ ⎝6 π ⎠ ⎝ π ⎠ ⎦
1 ⎡ 3 ⎛1 1 ⎞ ⎛ 4 ⎞ 2 1 3⎤
= 2(b − 3ab2 + 3a 2b − a 3 ) ⎜ − 2 ⎟ + a (b2 − 2ab + a 2 ) ⎜ 1 − 2 ⎟+a b− 3a ⎥
a + b ⎢⎣ ⎝ 6 π ⎠ ⎝ π ⎠ ⎦
1 ⎡ b3 + a 3 2 3 ⎤
= ⎢
a+b ⎣ 3
(
− 2 b − ab2 − a 2b + a 3 ⎥
π
)
⎦
b3 + a 3 2
= − 2 (b − a ) 2 .
3(b + a ) π
1. Unless information to the contrary is available, the normal distribution should be applied as the default
distribution.
2. If it is suspected that the distribution of the value of interest is skewed, apply the lognormal distribution.
In using the normal or lognormal distribution, some effort must be made to estimate a containment probability.
If a set of containment limits is available, but 100% containment has been observed, then the following is
recommended:
3. If the value of interest has been subjected to random usage or handling stress, and is assumed to possess a central
tendency, apply the cosine distribution. If it is suspected that values are more evenly distributed, apply either the
quadratic or half-cosine distribution, as appropriate. The triangular distribution may be applicable to estimating
uncertainty due to interpolation errors, and, under certain rare circumstances, when dealing with parameters
following testing or calibration.
4. If the amplitude of the value of interest varies sinusoidally with time, apply the U distribution.
5. If the value of interest is the resolution uncertainty of a digital readout, apply the uniform distribution. This
distribution is also applicable to estimating the uncertainty due to quantization error and the uncertainty in RF
phase angle.