Chapter 2 How to Report and Use Uncertainties Having read Chapter 1, you should now have some idea of the importance of experi- mental uncertainties and how they arise. You should also understand how uncertain- ties can be estimated in a few simple situations. In this chapter, you will learn some basic notations and rules of error analysis and study examples of their use in typical experiments in a physics laboratory. The aim is to familiarize you with the basic vocabulary of error analysis and its use in the introductory laboratory. Chapter 3 begins a systematic study of how uncertainties are actually evaluated. Sections 2.1 to 2.3 define several basic concepts in error analysis and discuss general rules for stating uncertainties. Sections 2.4 to 2.6 discuss how these ideas could be used in typical experiments in an introductory physics laboratory. Finally, Sections 2.7 to 2.9 introduce fractional uncertainty and discuss its significance. 2.1 Best Estimate + Uncertainty We have seen that the correct way to state the result of measurement is to give a best estimate of the quantity and the range within which you are confident the quantity lies. For example, the result of the timings discussed in Section 1.6 was reported as best estimate of time = 2.4 s, (2.1) probable range: 2.3 to 2.5 s. Here, the best estimate, 2.4 s, lies at the midpoint of the estimated range of probable values, 2.3 to 2.5 s, as it has in all the examples. This relationship is obviously natural and pertains in most measurements. It allows the results of the measurement to be expressed in compact form. For example, the measurement of the time re- corded in (2.1) is usually stated as follows: measured value of time = 2.4 + 0.1 s. (2.2) This single equation is equivalent to the two statements in (2.1). In general, the result of any measurement of a quantity x is stated as (2.3)14 Chapter 2: How to Report and Use Uncertainties This statement means, first, that the experimenter’s best estimate for the quantity concerned is the number x,..,, and second, that he or she is reasonably confident the quantity lies somewhere between Xie, — x and Xe, + Sx. The number dx is called the uncertainty, or error, or margin of error in the measurement of x. For conve- nience, the uncertainty &x is always defined to be positive, so that Xe + Ox is always the highest probable value of the measured quantity and x,.4 — 6x the lowest. T have intentionally left the meaning of the range Xjeq, — 5X tO Xpege + &¥ SoMe- what vague, but it can sometimes be made more precise. In a simple measurement such as that of the height of a doorway, we can easily state a range Xpeq — 8 tO yea + Sx within which we are absolutely certain the measured quantity lies. Unfortunately, in most scientific measurements, such a statement is hard to make. In particular, to be completely certain that the measured quantity lies between Xess — OK and Xyeq, + Sx, We usually have to choose a value for A that is too large to be useful. To avoid this situation, we can sometimes choose a value for x that lets us state with a certain percent confidence that the actual quantity lies within the Tange Xe, + Sx. For instance, the public opinion polls conducted during elections are traditionally stated with margins of error that represent 95% confidence limits. The statement that 60% of the electorate favor Candidate A, with a margin of error of 3 percentage points (60 + 3), means that the pollsters are 95% confident that the percent of voters favoring Candidate A is between 57 and 63; in other words, after many elections, we should expect the correct answer to have been inside the stated margins of error 95% of the times and outside these margins only 5% of the times. Obviously, we cannot state a percent confidence in our margins of error until we understand the statistical laws that govern the process of measurement. I return to this point in Chapter 4. For now, let us be content with defining the uncertainty ‘x so that we are “reasonably certain” the measured quantity lies between Xie, — &¢ and Xyeq, + Sx. Quick Check! 2.1. (a) A student measures the length of a simple pendulum and reports his best estimate as 110 mm and the range in which the length probably lies as 108 to 112 mm. Rewrite this result in the standard form (2.3). (b) If another student reports her measurement of a current as J = 3.05 + 0.03 amps, what is the range within which / probably lies? 2.2 Significant Figures Several basic rules for stating uncertainties are worth emphasizing. First, because the quantity ér is an estimate of an uncertainty, obviously it should not be stated "These “Quick Checks” appear at intervals through the text to give you a chance to check your understand- ing of the concept just introduced. They are straightforward exercises, and many can be done in your head. 1 urge you to take a moment to make sure you can do them; if you cannot, you should reread the preceding few paragraphs.Section 2.2 Significant Figures with too much precision. If we measure the acceleration of gravity g, it would be absurd to state a result like (measured g) = 9.82 + 0.02385 mis (2.4) The uncertainty in the measurement cannot conceivably be known to four significant figures. In high-precision work, uncertainties are sometimes stated with two signifi- cant figures, but for our purposes we can state the following rule: ; “Rule for Stating Uncertainties Experimental uncertainties should almost Baas eit (2.5) cc fouelied to one sani He Thus, if some calculation yields the uncertainty 6g = 0.02385 m/s’, this answer should be rounded to 5g = 0.02 m/s”, and the conclusion (2.4) should be rewritten as (measured g) = 9.82 + 0.02 m/s?. (2.6) ‘An important practical consequence of this rule is that many error calculations can be carried out mentally without using a calculator or even pencil and paper. The rule (2.5) has only one significant exception. If the leading digit in the uncertainty dr is a 1, then keeping two significant figures in Sx may be better. For example, suppose that some calculation gave the uncertainty x = 0.14. Rounding this number to 6x = 0.1 would be a substantial proportionate reduction, so we could argue that retaining two figures might be less misleading, and quote 6x = 0.14, The same argument could perhaps be applied if the leading digit is a 2 but certainly not if it is any larger. Once the uncertainty in a measurement has been estimated, the significant fig- ures in the measured value must be considered. A statement such as measured speed = 6051.78 + 30 m/s (2.7) is obviously ridiculous. The uncertainty of 30 means that the digit 5 might really be as small as 2 or as large as 8. Clearly the trailing digits 1, 7, and 8 have no signifi- cance at all and should be rounded. That is, the correct statement of (2.7) is measured speed = 6050 + 30 mis. (2.8) The general rule is this: Rule for Stating Answers The last significant figure in any stated answer should 29) usually be of the same order of magnitude (in the ‘same decimal position) as the uncertainty,Chapter 2: How to Report and Use Uncertainties For example, the answer 92.81 with an uncertainty of 0.3 should be rounded as 92.8 + 0.3. If its uncertainty is 3, then the same answer should be rounded as 93 + 3, and if the uncertainty is 30, then the answer should be 90 + 30. An important qualification to rules (2.5) and (2.9) is as follows: To reduce inaccuracies caused by rounding, any numbers to be used in subsequent calculations should normally retain at least one significant figure more than is finally justified. At the end of the calculations, the final answer should be rounded to remove these extra, insignificant figures. An electronic calculator will happily carry numbers with far more digits than are likely to be significant in any calculation you make in a laboratory. Obviously, these numbers do not need to be rounded in the middle of a calculation but certainly must be rounded appropriately for the final answers.” Note that the uncertainty in any measured quantity has the same dimensions as the measured quantity itself. Therefore, writing the units (m/s, cm’, etc.) after both the answer and the uncertainty is clearer and more economical, as in Equations (2.6) and (2.8). By the same token, if a measured number is so large or small that it calls for scientific notation (the use of the form 3 X 10° instead of 3,000, for example), then it is simpler and clearer to put the answer and uncertainty in the same form. For example, the result measured charge = (1.61 + 0.05) x 10~" coulombs is much easier to read and understand in this form than it would be in the form measured charge = 1.61 X 107! + 5 x 107! coulombs. Quick Check 2.2. Rewrite each of the following measurements in its most appropriate form: (a) v = 8.123456 + 0.0312 m/s (b) x = 3.1234 x 10*+ 2m (©) m = 5.6789 x 10-7 + 3 x 107° kg. 2.3. Discrepancy Before I address the question of how to use uncertainties in experimental reports, a few important terms should be introduced and defined. First, if two measurements 2Rule (2.9) has one more small exception. If the leading digit in the uncertainty is small (a 1 o, perhaps, 2), retaining one extra digit in the final answer may be appropriate. For example, an answer such as 3.6 + 1 is quite acceptable because one could argue that rounding it to 4 1 would waste information,