ISO/IEC 17043:2010 適合性評価 — 技能試験の一般要件 | ページ 6

3.1

assigned value

value attributed to a particular property of a proficiency test item

3.2

coordinator

one or more individuals with responsibility for organizing and managing all of the activities involved in the operation of a proficiency testing scheme

3.3

customer

organization or individual for which a proficiency testing scheme is provided through a contractual arrangement

3.4

interlaboratory comparison

organization, performance and evaluation of measurements or tests on the same or similar items by two or more laboratories in accordance with predetermined conditions

3.5

outlier

observation in a set of data that appears to be inconsistent with the remainder of that set

Note 1 to entry: An outlier can originate from a different population or be the result of an incorrect recording or other gross error.

3.6

participant

laboratory, organization or individual that receives proficiency test items and submits results for review by the proficiency testing provider

Note 1 to entry: In some cases, the participant can be an inspection body.

3.7

proficiency testing

evaluation of participant performance against pre-established criteria by means of interlaboratory comparisons

Note 2 to entry: Some providers of proficiency testing in the medical area use the term “External Quality Assessment (EQA)” for their proficiency testing schemes, or for their broader programmes, or both (see Annex A). The requirements of this International Standard cover only those EQA activities that meet the definition of proficiency testing.

3.8

proficiency test item

sample, product, artefact, reference material, piece of equipment, measurement standard, data set or other information used for proficiency testing

3.9

proficiency testing provider

organization which takes responsibility for all tasks in the development and operation of a proficiency testing scheme

3.10

proficiency testing round

single complete sequence of distribution of proficiency test items, and the evaluation and reporting of results to the participants

3.11

proficiency testing scheme

proficiency testing designed and operated in one or more rounds for a specified area of testing, measurement, calibration or inspection

Note 1 to entry: A proficiency testing scheme might cover a particular type of test, calibration, inspection or a number of tests, calibrations or inspections on proficiency test items.

3.12

robust statistical method

statistical method insensitive to small departures from underlying assumptions surrounding an underlying probabilistic model

3.13

standard deviation for proficiency assessment

measure of dispersion used in the evaluation of results of proficiency testing, based on the available information

Note 1 to entry: The standard deviation applies only to ratio and differential scale results.

Note 2 to entry: Not all proficiency testing schemes evaluate proficiency based on the dispersion of results.

3.14

subcontractor

organization or individual engaged by the proficiency testing provider to perform activities specified in this International Standard and that affect the quality of a proficiency testing scheme

Note 1 to entry: The term “subcontractor” includes what many proficiency testing providers call collaborators.

3.15

metrological traceability

property of a measurement result whereby the result can be related to a reference through a documented unbroken chain of calibrations, each contributing to the measurement uncertainty

Note 1 to entry: For this definition, a “reference” can be a definition of a measurement unit through its practical realization, or a measurement procedure including the measurement unit for a non-ordinal quantity, or a measurement standard.

Note 2 to entry: Metrological traceability requires an established calibration hierarchy.

Note 3 to entry: Specification of the reference must include the time at which this reference was used in establishing the calibration hierarchy, along with any other relevant metrological information about the reference, such as when the first calibration in the calibration hierarchy was performed.

Note 4 to entry: For measurements with more than one input quantity in the measurement model, each of the input quantity values should itself be metrologically traceable and the calibration hierarchy involved may form a branched structure or a network. The effort involved in establishing metrological traceability for each input quantity value should be commensurate with its relative contribution to the measurement result.

Note 5 to entry: Metrological traceability of a measurement result does not ensure that the measurement uncertainty is adequate for a given purpose or that there is an absence of mistakes.

Note 6 to entry: A comparison between two measurement standards may be viewed as a calibration if the comparison is used to check and, if necessary, correct the quantity value and measurement uncertainty attributed to one of the measurement standards.

Note 7 to entry: The ILAC ¹⁾ considers the elements for confirming metrological traceability to be an unbroken metrological traceability chain to an international measurement standard or a national measurement standard, a documented measurement uncertainty, a documented measurement procedure, accredited technical competence, metrological traceability to the SI, and calibration intervals (see ILAC P-10:2002).

Note 8 to entry: The abbreviated term “traceability” is sometimes used to mean “metrological traceability” as well as other concepts, such as “sample traceability” or “document traceability” or “instrument traceability” or “material traceability”, where the history (“trace”) of an item is meant. Therefore, the full term of “metrological traceability” is preferred if there is any risk of confusion.

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007, definition 2.41]

3.16

measurement uncertainty

uncertainty of measurement

uncertainty

non-negative parameter characterizing the dispersion of the quantity values being attributed to a measurand, based on the information used

Note 1 to entry: Measurement uncertainty includes components arising from systematic effects, such as components associated with corrections and the assigned quantity values of measurement standards, as well as the definitional uncertainty. Sometimes estimated systematic effects are not corrected for but, instead, associated measurement uncertainty components are incorporated.

Note 2 to entry: The parameter may be, for example, a standard deviation called standard measurement uncertainty (or a specified multiple of it), or the half-width of an interval, having a stated coverage probability.

Note 3 to entry: Measurement uncertainty comprises, in general, many components. Some of these may be evaluated by Type A evaluation of measurement uncertainty from the statistical distribution of the quantity values from series of measurements and can be characterized by standard deviations. The other components, which may be evaluated by Type B evaluation of measurement uncertainty, can also be characterized by standard deviations, evaluated from probability density functions based on experience or other information.

Note 4 to entry: In general, for a given set of information, it is understood that the measurement uncertainty is associated with a stated quantity value attributed to the measurand. A modification of this value results in a modification of the associated uncertainty.

[SOURCE: ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007, definition 2.26]