The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results
Abstract
Preface to the 1994 Edition The previous edition, which was the first, of this National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Technical Note (TN 1297) was initially published in January 1993. A second printing followed shortly thereafter, and in total some 10 000 copies were distributed to individuals at NIST and in both the United States at large and abroad — to metrologists, scientists, engineers, statisticians, and others who are concerned with measurement and the evaluation and expression of the uncertainty of the result of a measurement. On the whole, these individuals gave TN 1297 a very positive reception. We were, of course, pleased that a document intended as a guide to NIST staff was also considered to be of significant value to the international measurement community.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results
Taylor, B. N. (1994) · National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Technical Note 1297 · doi:10.6028/nist.tn.1297 · Cited by 2,833
Self-citation
Cited by
Galbraith, R. F., & Roberts, R. G. (2012) · Quaternary Geochronology · doi:10.1016/j.quageo.2012.04.020 · Cited by 731
NIST-F1: recent improvements and accuracy evaluations
Heavner, T. P., Jefferts, S. R., Donley, E. A., Shirley, J. H., & Parker, T. E. (2005) · Metrologia · doi:10.1088/0026-1394/42/5/012 · Cited by 355
Review of clinical brachytherapy uncertainties: Analysis guidelines of GEC-ESTRO and the AAPM
Kirisits, C., Rivard, M. J., Baltas, D., Ballester, F., De Brabandere, M., van der Laarse, R., Niatsetski, Y., Papagiannis, P., Hellebust, T. P., Perez-Calatayud, J., et al. (2014) · Radiotherapy and Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2013.11.002 · Cited by 314
Terahertz spectroscopy on polymers: A review of morphological studies
Wietzke, S., Jansen, C., Reuter, M., Jung, T., Kraft, D., Chatterjee, S., Fischer, B. M., & Koch, M. (2011) · Journal of Molecular Structure · doi:10.1016/j.molstruc.2011.07.036 · Cited by 254
Kay, M., Kola, T., Hullman, J. R., & Munson, S. A. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2858036.2858558 · Cited by 239
Metadata
- Authors
- Taylor, B. N., & Kuyatt, C. E.
- Published
- 2018-01
- OpenAlex
- W149807329
- Cited by
- 2,582
- References
- 1
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.6028/nist.tn.1297-1993
- The paper
- Taylor, B. N., & Kuyatt, C. E. (2018). Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results. https://doi.org/10.6028/nist.tn.1297-1993
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
