Comparison of Homogeneity Testing Uncertainty Assessment Using the Range Method and F-Test for Certified Reference Materials

Comparison of Homogeneity Testing Uncertainty Assessment Using the Range Method and F-Test for Certified Reference Materials | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Comparison of Homogeneity Testing Uncertainty Assessment Using the Range Method and F -Test for Certified Reference Materials Li Haifeng This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9547410/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The F -test, as recommended by ISO Guide 35, is a standard method for evaluating homogeneity in the development of certified reference materials. Recently, the range method has been developed as an efficient alternative, offering simpler operation and greater ease of comprehension. Despite these differences, both methods yield comparable results. For instance, in two sets of homogeneity test data, the between-bottle standard uncertainty ( u bb ) was determined to be 0.052 using the F -test and 0.059 using the range method in one case, while in another, the u bb values were 3.93 and 3.92, respectively. Given its practicality and speed, the range method shows promise for real-time and rapid analyses in future studies. Analytical Chemistry Certified Reference Material Inorganic analysis Environment Element Rescaled range analysis Full Text Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9547410","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":630704631,"identity":"b72db6ca-d630-4c90-b589-a30133f24a83","order_by":0,"name":"Li Haifeng","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Institute of Metrology","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Li","middleName":"","lastName":"Haifeng","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-28 02:52:39","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9547410/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9547410/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":108070892,"identity":"48a70414-f871-41f5-b97e-0a17cd3a5dce","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-29 05:59:58","extension":"pdf","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":270899,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ComparisonofHomogeneityTestingandUncertaintyAssessmentUsingtheRangeMethodandFTestforCertifiedReferenceMaterialsNat.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9547410/v1_covered_74db393d-adc6-4721-95af-267685ca9ec0.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison of Homogeneity Testing Uncertainty Assessment Using the Range Method and \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e-Test for Certified Reference Materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":false,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"National Institute of Metrology","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":true,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":true,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Certified Reference Material, Inorganic analysis, Environment, Element, Rescaled range analysis","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9547410/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9547410/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e-test, as recommended by ISO Guide 35, is a standard method for evaluating homogeneity in the development of certified reference materials. Recently, the range method has been developed as an efficient alternative, offering simpler operation and greater ease of comprehension. Despite these differences, both methods yield comparable results. For instance, in two sets of homogeneity test data, the between-bottle standard uncertainty (\u003cem\u003eu\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ebb\u003c/sub\u003e) was determined to be 0.052 using the \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e-test and 0.059 using the range method in one case, while in another, the \u003cem\u003eu\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003ebb\u003c/sub\u003e values were 3.93 and 3.92, respectively. Given its practicality and speed, the range method shows promise for real-time and rapid analyses in future studies.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Comparison of Homogeneity Testing Uncertainty Assessment Using the Range Method and F-Test for Certified Reference Materials","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-29 05:59:52","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9547410/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"dcb6f0ee-4368-401b-9c15-3a24613f1a5b","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 29th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":67127740,"name":"Analytical Chemistry"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-29T05:59:52+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-29 05:59:52","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9547410","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9547410","identity":"rs-9547410","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}