Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

On a curious bias arising when the $\sqrt{\chi^2/\nu}$ scaling prescription is first applied to a sub-sample of the individual results

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2001.07562 v1 pith:FX4NARVJ submitted 2020-01-17 physics.data-an hep-phmath.HO

classification physics.data-anhep-phmath.HO
keywords individualprescriptionresultsresultstandardappliedbiascombination
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
abstract

As it is well known, the standard deviation of a weighted average depends only on the individual standard deviations, but not on the dispersion of the values around the mean. This property leads sometimes to the embarrassing situation in which the combined result 'looks' somehow at odds with the individual ones. A practical way to cure the problem is to enlarge the resulting standard deviation by the $\sqrt{\chi^2/\nu}$ scaling, a prescription employed with arbitrary criteria on when to apply it and which individual results to use in the combination. But the `apparent' discrepancy between the combined result and the individual ones often remains. Moreover this rule does not affect the resulting `best value', even if the pattern of the individual results is highly skewed. In addition to these reasons of dissatisfaction, shared by many practitioners, the method causes another issue, recently noted on the published measurements of the charged kaon mass. It happens in fact that, if the prescription is applied twice, i.e. first to a sub-sample of the individual results and subsequently to the entire sample, then a bias on the result of the overall combination is introduced. The reason is that the prescription does not guaranty statistical sufficiency, whose importance is reminded in this script, written with a didactic spirit, with some historical notes and with a language to which most physicists are accustomed. The conclusion contains general remarks on the effective presentation of the experimental findings and a pertinent puzzle is proposed in the Appendix.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Implementing Errors on Errors: Bayesian vs Frequentist

    hep-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    D'Agostini's Bayesian gamma prior and Cowan's frequentist gamma variance model are the same gamma law under the parameter map k = lambda = (n-1)/2 = 1/(4 epsilon^2).

Pith tools