Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:17:01.832Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Information-Efficient Bayesian Model for AMS Data Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

V Palonen  and
P Tikkanen
V Palonen*
Affiliation:
Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 43, FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland
P Tikkanen
Affiliation:
Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 43, FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland
*
Corresponding author. Email: vesa.palonen@helsinki.fi
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A Bayesian model for accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) data analysis is presented. Instrumental drift is modeled with a continuous autoregressive (CAR) process, and measurement uncertainties are taken to be Gaussian. All samples have a parameter describing their true value. The model adapts itself to different instrumental parameters based on the data, and yields the most probable true values for the unknown samples. The model is able to use the information in the measurements more efficiently. First, all measurements tell something about the overall instrument performance and possible drift. The overall machine uncertainty can be used to obtain realistic uncertainties even when the number of measurements per sample is small. Second, even the measurements of the unknown samples can be used to estimate the variations in the standard level, provided that the samples have been measured more than once. Third, the uncertainty of the standard level is known to be smaller nearer a standard. Fourth, even though individual measurements follow a Gaussian distribution, the end result may not.

For simulated data, the new Bayesian method gives more accurate results and more realistic uncertainties than the conventional mean-based (MB) method. In some cases, the latter gives unrealistically small uncertainties. This can be due to the non-Gaussian nature of the final result, which results from combining few samples from a Gaussian distribution without knowing the underlying variance and from the normalization with an uncertain standard level. In addition, in some cases the standard error of the mean does not represent well the true error due to correlations within the measurements resulting from, for example, a changing trend. While the conventional method fails in these cases, the CAR model gives representative uncertainties.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , 2007 , pp. 369 - 377
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Arnold, L. 1971. Stochastic Differential Equations: Theory and Applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 246 p.Google Scholar
Broemeling, LD, Cook, P. 1997. A Bayesian analysis of regression models with continuous errors with application to longitudinal studies. Statistics in Medicine 16(4):321–32.Google Scholar
Jones, RH. 1993. Longitudinal Data with Serial Correlations: A State-space Approach. London: Chapman & Hall. 240 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palonen, V, Tikkanen, P. 2007. A shot at a Bayesian model for data analysis in AMS measurements. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259(1):154–7.Google Scholar
Scott, EM. 2003. Section 1: the Fourth International Radiocarbon Intercomparison (FIRI). Radiocarbon 45(2):135–50.Google Scholar
Vogel, JS, Ognibene, T, Palmblad, M, Reimer, P. 2004. Counting statistics and ion interval density in AMS. Radiocarbon 46(3):1103–9.Google Scholar