In my
statistics course, similarly to I guess all other teachers concerned in
calibration, I teach that for instrumental analyses weighted linear regression
should be used. Why? Non-weighted linear regression (the one we can use with
LINEST, SLOPE and INTERCEPT in excel) assumes same signal precision
(repeatability standard deviation in other words) for all concentrations in the
calibration range. For instrumental analyses however the relative standard
deviation of the signal is usually (there are some specific instruments where
this does not apply) nearly constant over concentrations used.
Veronica
Meyer1 published in LC/GC a good simulation aiming to show how much results
are influenced by either using or not using weighting in linear regression.
Their
simulations effectively demonstrate that advantages of weighting are observed
only if all following four things happen simultaneously:
1. Absolute repeatability standard
deviation is not constant over given concentration range.
2. The calibration range is very
wide.
3. Calibration points are
distributed equally over the calibration range.
4. Sample result is at the lower end
of the calibration range.
For example if calibration points 2, 1000, 2000, 3000 and 5000 units
were used for calibration and the sample with actual concentration of 2.0 units
was measured unweighted regression yielded answer of 8.3 but weighted resulted
in 1.95 units. This simulation only included random errors.
On the
other hand if a narrower calibration range – around one order of magnitude –
would be used there is no significant difference in using or not using
weighting.
So what to
do if you are in the lab doing your actual analyses? I’d suggest you to prepare
at least 5 point approximately equally spaced standard solutions for each order
of magnitude your method needs to work in. For example if you samples
concentrations may range from 10 – 1000 ppb I’d suggest following solutions:
10, 25, 50, 75, 100, 250, 500, 750 and 1000 ppb.
After
analysing these solutions I would break up this calibration into two parts 1)
10-100 ppb and 2) 100-1000 ppb. This way you can assure that the highest
concentrations on the calibration graph do not influence the accuracy of the
samples in the lower end.
Good
calibration!
1 V. Meyer Weighted Linear Least-Squares Fit — A
Need? Monte Carlo Simulation Gives the Answer, LC/GC 28 (2015) 204-210.
No comments:
Post a Comment