Robotics evidence guide · automated editorial preparation, not expert review
Report uncertainty in robot measurements
A reported placement error needs a measurement method and uncertainty context. More decimal places do not establish a more accurate robot.
Evidence and interpretation
NIST TN 1297 distinguishes an estimate’s uncertainty from its unknown error. Maha’s proposed measurement record therefore separates repeat observations from instrument specifications, calibration evidence and analysis assumptions. Describe the measured quantity precisely: object center, tool center point and nearest surface distance are not interchangeable. Preserve raw observations and the calculation version. When required inputs are missing, report an incomplete uncertainty assessment rather than inserting a plausible percentage.
Proposed evidence workflow
- Define the measurand, reference frame, units and observation method.
- List each uncertainty contribution, its basis and any dependence between inputs.
- Keep the engineering acceptance tolerance separate from measurement uncertainty; state the decision rule used.
Worked illustration
A hypothetical placement is reported as 2 mm from the target. Without the reference instrument’s uncertainty, that number alone cannot resolve acceptance against a 2 mm limit. The proposed packet retains the observation and marks the acceptance decision unresolved; it does not silently round the result into a pass.
Limits
No robot-specific uncertainty budget or metrology certification is supplied. The integer grid has exact model coordinates, not zero-uncertainty physical measurements.
Sources and review
Locator: §2.1–2.4, including the note distinguishing error and uncertainty
Measurement uncertainty accompanies an estimate; Type A and Type B classify evaluation methods, not simply random versus systematic effects.
Boundary: This section does not supply robot-specific tolerances, a calibration certificate or a complete uncertainty budget.
Inspection and reuse basis
Selected sections inspected 2026-09-15. Original paraphrase and link only; no publication reproduced. This is not independent expert review of this article.