|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| Puydarrieux, Stéphane; Pou, Jean Michel; Leblond, Laurent; Fischer, Nicolas; Allard, Alexandre; Feinberg, Max; El Guennouni, Driss. |
| Conformity assessment, focused on risks quantification, evolved from being binary to being probabilistic. In fact, new methods described by the standard ISO CEI guide 98-4 [1] and FD X 07-039 [2] show how measurement uncertainty is integrated in the conformity assessment (FD X 07-039 : “Role of measurement uncertainty in conformity assessment – implementation of NF ISO/IEC Guide 98-4 – illustration through industrial case studies”). In such a probabilistic framework, the conformity assessment relies on two quantities: the measurement with its related uncertainty and the measurand prior knowledge. Both quantities are combined statistically to determine measurand posterior knowledge, and to quantify a global or specific risks either for the producer or the... |
| Tipo: Text |
|
| Ano: 2019 |
URL: https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00693/80495/83682.pdf |
| |
|
|
| Allard, Alexandre; Fischer, Nicolas; Smith, Ian; Harris, Peter; Pendrill, Leslie. |
| In 2012, the Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (JCGM) published novel guidance on the consideration of measurement uncertainty for decision-making in conformity assessment (JCGM 106:2012). The two situations of making a wrong decision are considered: the risk of accepting a non-conforming item, denoted as the customer risk, and the risk of rejecting a conforming item, denoted as the producer risk. In 2017, the revision of ISO 17025 obliged calibration and testing laboratories to “document the decision rule employed, taking into account the level of risk (such as false accept and false reject and statistical assumptions) associated with the decision rule employed, and apply the decision rule” in the context of the decision made about the conformity of... |
| Tipo: Text |
|
| Ano: 2019 |
URL: https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00693/80494/83681.pdf |
| |
|
|
|
