On the equivalence of generalized least-squares approaches to the evaluation of measurement comparisons

Abstract

Analysis of CIPM international comparisons is increasingly being carried out using a model-based approach that leads naturally to a generalized least-squares (GLS) solution. While this method offers the advantages of being easier to audit and having general applicability to any form of comparison protocol, there is a lack of consensus over aspects of its implementation. Two significant results are presented that show the equivalence of three differing approaches discussed by or applied in comparisons run by Consultative Committees of the CIPM. Both results depend on a mathematical condition equivalent to the requirement that any two artefacts in the comparison are linked through a sequence of measurements of overlapping pairs of artefacts. The first result is that a GLS estimator excluding all sources of error common to all measurements of a participant is equal to the GLS estimator incorporating all sources of error, including those associated with any bias in the standards or procedures of the measuring laboratory. The second result identifies the component of uncertainty in the estimate of bias that arises from possible systematic effects in the participants' measurement standards and procedures. The expression so obtained is a generalization of an expression previously published for a one-artefact comparison with no inter-participant correlations, to one for a comparison comprising any number of repeat measurements of multiple artefacts and allowing for inter-laboratory correlations.