Propagating Error Log
Contents |
a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions you might have Meta Discuss the workings and policies of
How To Calculate Uncertainty Of Logarithm
this site About Us Learn more about Stack Overflow the company Business error propagation ln Learn more about hiring developers or posting ads with us Physics Questions Tags Users Badges Unanswered Ask Question _
Error Propagation Calculator
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute: Sign up Here's how it works: error propagation physics Anybody can ask a question Anybody can answer The best answers are voted up and rise to the top The error of the natural logarithm up vote 10 down vote favorite 2 Can anyone explain why the error for $\ln (x)$ (where for $x$ we have $x\pm\Delta x$) is simply said to be $\frac{\Delta x}{x}$? I would very much appreciate a somewhat uncertainty logarithm base 10 rigorous rationalization of this step. Additionally, is this the case for other logarithms (e.g. $\log_2(x)$), or how would that be done? error-analysis share|cite|improve this question edited Jan 25 '14 at 20:01 Chris Mueller 4,72811444 asked Jan 25 '14 at 18:31 Just_a_fool 3341413 add a comment| 2 Answers 2 active oldest votes up vote 17 down vote accepted Simple error analysis assumes that the error of a function $\Delta f(x)$ by a given error $\Delta x$ of the input argument is approximately $$ \Delta f(x) \approx \frac{\text{d}f(x)}{\text{d}x}\cdot\Delta x $$ The mathematical reasoning behind this is the Taylor series and the character of $\frac{\text{d}f(x)}{\text{d}x}$ describing how the function $f(x)$ changes when its input argument changes a little bit. In fact this assumption makes only sense if $\Delta x \ll x$ (see Emilio Pisanty's answer for details on this) and if your function isnt too nonlinear at the specific point (in which case the presentation of a result in the form $f(x) \pm \Delta f(x)$ wouldnt make sense anyway). Note that sometimes $\left| \frac{\text{d}f(x)}{\text{d}x}\right|$ is used to avoid getting negative erros. Since $$ \frac{\text{d}\ln(x)}{\text{d}x}
Engineering Medicine Agriculture Photosciences Humanities Periodic Table of the Elements Reference Tables Physical Constants Units and Conversions Organic Chemistry Glossary Search site Search Search
Error Propagation Chemistry
Go back to previous article Username Password Sign in Sign in Sign error propagation definition in Registration Forgot password Expand/collapse global hierarchy Home Core Analytical Chemistry Quantifying Nature Expand/collapse global location Propagation of
Error Propagation Excel
Error Last updated 20:33, 14 May 2016 Save as PDF Share Share Share Tweet Share IntroductionDerivation of Exact FormulaDerivation of Arithmetic ExampleCaveats and WarningsDisadvantages of Propagation of Error ApproachTreatment http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/95254/the-error-of-the-natural-logarithm of Covariance TermsReferencesContributors Propagation of Error (or Propagation of Uncertainty) is defined as the effects on a function by a variable's uncertainty. It is a calculus derived statistical calculation designed to combine uncertainties from multiple variables, in order to provide an accurate measurement of uncertainty. Introduction Every measurement has an air of uncertainty about it, and not all uncertainties http://chem.libretexts.org/Core/Analytical_Chemistry/Quantifying_Nature/Significant_Digits/Propagation_of_Error are equal. Therefore, the ability to properly combine uncertainties from different measurements is crucial. Uncertainty in measurement comes about in a variety of ways: instrument variability, different observers, sample differences, time of day, etc. Typically, error is given by the standard deviation (\(\sigma_x\)) of a measurement. Anytime a calculation requires more than one variable to solve, propagation of error is necessary to properly determine the uncertainty. For example, lets say we are using a UV-Vis Spectrophotometer to determine the molar absorptivity of a molecule via Beer's Law: A = ε l c. Since at least two of the variables have an uncertainty based on the equipment used, a propagation of error formula must be applied to measure a more exact uncertainty of the molar absorptivity. This example will be continued below, after the derivation (see Example Calculation). Derivation of Exact Formula Suppose a certain experiment requires multiple instruments to carry out. These instruments each have different variability in their measurements. The results of each instrument are given as: a, b, c, d... (For simplification purposes, on
with: (1) Functions of several variables. (2) Evaluation of partial derivatives, and the chain rules of differentiation. (3) Manipulation of summations in algebraic context. At this https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/scenario/errorman/calculus.htm mathematical level our presentation can be briefer. We can dispense with the tedious explanations and elaborations of previous chapters. 6.2 THE CHAIN RULE AND DETERMINATE ERRORS If a result R = R(x,y,z) is calculated from a number of data quantities, x, y and z, then the relation: [6-1] ∂R ∂R ∂R dR = —— dx + —— dy + —— error propagation dz ∂x ∂y ∂z
holds. This is one of the "chain rules" of calculus. This equation has as many terms as there are variables. Then, if the fractional errors are small, the differentials dR, dx, dy and dz may be replaced by the absolute errors ΔR, Δx, Δy, and Δz, and written: [6-2] ∂R ∂R ∂R ΔR ≈ propagating error log —— Δx + —— Δy + —— Δz ∂x ∂y ∂z Strictly this is no longer an equality, but an approximation to DR, since the higher order terms in the Taylor expansion have been neglected. So long as the errors are of the order of a few percent or less, this will not matter. This equation is now an error propagation equation. [6-3] Finally, divide equation (6.2) by R: ΔR x ∂R Δx y ∂R Δy z ∂R Δz —— = —————+——— ——+————— R R ∂x x R ∂y y R ∂z z The factors of the form Δx/x, Δy/y, etc are relative (fractional) errors. This equation shows how the errors in the result depend on the errors in the data. Eq. 6.2 and 6.3 are called the standard form error equations. They are also called determinate error equations, because they are strictly valid for determinate errors (not indeterminate errors). [We'll get to indeterminate errors soon.] The coefficients in Eq. 6.3 of the fractional errors are of the form [(x/R)(∂R/dx)]. These play the very impor