Adaptive calibration and quality control of smart sensors by Matej Možek; Danilo Vrtačnik; Drago Resnik; Borut Pečar;

By Matej Možek; Danilo Vrtačnik; Drago Resnik; Borut Pečar; Slavko Amon; et al

Show description

Read or Download Adaptive calibration and quality control of smart sensors PDF

Similar nonfiction_6 books

Seriation, stratigraphy, and index fossils: the backbone of archaeological dating

It's tough for brand new scholars of archaeology to visualize an period whilst chronometric relationship equipment have been unavailable. although, even an informal perusal of the big physique of literature that arose throughout the first 1/2 the 20 th century unearths a battery of smart equipment used to figure out the relative a long time of archaeological phenomena, usually with substantial precision.

Why Does Policy Change: Lessons from British Transport Policy 1945-95 (Routledge Studies in Governance and Public Policy)

The stress among coverage balance and alter is a key political phenomenon, yet its dynamics were little understood. Why Does coverage switch? examines and explains the dynamics of significant coverage swap via case stories from British shipping coverage given that 1945. the numerous contrasts among highway and rail guidelines during this interval lend themselves completely to the authors' theories of what brings approximately coverage turnabout.

Get acquainted with god

Get conversant in God. constructing wealthy fellowship with our Heavenly Father is most sensible precedence to be able to stroll within the supernatural

Extra resources for Adaptive calibration and quality control of smart sensors

Example text

5,6,7,8] The consequences of errors that are bound to occur in a radiation oncology clinical environment may be caused by the radiation oncologist, physicist, dosimetrist or radiation therapist. Of these errors, the most grievous to the patient are the systematic errors made by the physicists without his or her perception. 12 Applications and Experiences of Quality Control Therefore, the type of mistakes made by each staff member is different, as is the magnitude of the impact to the patient, as specified below: • if a physician makes a mistake, it usually affects one patient; • if a dosimetrist makes a mistake, it affects one patient or one tumor location; • if a technologist makes a mistake, it normally affects one fraction of the treatment; • if a physicist makes a mistake, it may affect all patients in the clinic during a given period of time.

Ellerbroek, M. Brenner, P. , Practice accreditation for radiation oncology: quality is reality. J Am Coll Radiol, (2006). 3(10): p. 787-92 [20] R. Ochoa, F. Gome, I. H. Ferreira, F. Gutt and C. E. deAlmeida; CE. Design of a phantom for the quality control of high dose rate 192Ir source in brachytherapy. Radiotherapy and Oncology, (2007). (82), p. 222-228. [21] N. A. Ellerbroek, M. Brenner, P. , Practice accreditation for radiation oncology: quality is reality. J Am Coll Radiol, (2006). 3(10): p.

Wt is thus defined similarly as for the CUSUM tests. However, one major difference with the CUSUM test is that the SPRT has no holding barrier and presents two decision limits, one to accept the null hypothesis, and the other one to reject the alternative hypothesis. e. to reject the alternative, has led physicians to use it to monitor the learning curve Biau et al. (2007). However, there are caveats in using such a procedure. We have found no practical interest so far in detecting, at the same time, a shift towards inadequate or adequate performance.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.49 of 5 – based on 31 votes