No. One observation will normally get you onevalue, not a set of values. Also, to be precise, the observation is the act of observing; the value is the result of the observation, not the observation itself.
If you take a measurement multiple times, and get similar values each time, then the data is said to be very precise. If this group of data is very close to the expected value, then the data is said to be accurate. However, a set of data may be precise without being accurate if the measured values are all similar to one another, but not close to the expected value.
The set needs to be seen for an accurate value. A complete set of Lincoln cents from 1938 to 1959 has 62 coins in it.
They are the same thing. They give you an accurate representation of all the values in a data set
It depends on the size and mass of the rock. For a "normal" rock (as opposed to merely a stone) I suggest a crane with some means for measuring the rock's mass. A number of pulleys, each with a weighing machine should do the trick. Alternatively, you could use a weighbridge, if there is one in the vicinity. To obtain its volume, you probably need a 3-d laser-profiling device. That should give the most precise measurement of its volume.
No, part of the ship was a near-accurate rebuilt set, and most of it was CGI.
No. One observation will normally get you onevalue, not a set of values. Also, to be precise, the observation is the act of observing; the value is the result of the observation, not the observation itself.
That depends a lot on the application. In some cases, a 10% error (or even more) may be acceptable, in other, 1%, in others, you need a much higher precision. Generally, a %Error of approximately 5% is regarded as accurate. However, this is only a guideline for small experiments or data sets. Also, one should ensure that the relative standard deviation is less than 5% also. This ensures that the data set is precise.
Nowadays most receive a radio signal to set the time and keep it accurate
A set of exact measurements collected using accurate tools or devices is called a group of precise measurements. These measurements are detailed and consistent, providing specific and reliable data for analysis and comparison.
If you take a measurement multiple times, and get similar values each time, then the data is said to be very precise. If this group of data is very close to the expected value, then the data is said to be accurate. However, a set of data may be precise without being accurate if the measured values are all similar to one another, but not close to the expected value.
Page Layout Tab
Cutco knives are extremely good. I have a whole set of them. They are the most precise knives I have ever used. You won't be disappointed if you purchase some.
No. Consider shooting at a target. If you group all your shots in a very small area in the outermost part of the target you are more precise than if you had grouped them more loosely within the bull's eye and inner circle. You would be less accurate, though. Precision is not the same as accuracy.
Elano is a Brazilian footballer who plays for the Brazil national team. He is most famously known for his accurate passing during the game, as well as his high skill set.
A ruler with smaller, more closely spaced markings will provide a more precise measurement of the distance traveled by the snail. A metric ruler with millimeter markings would be the best option to achieve precise measurements.
Because the results we get when we calculate measurements are estimated or rounded up as some people say, so being around the true answer is called accurate. Also, the devices we use to measure ( scales are an example of this) are never actually perfectly precise in how they are set, plus they are not completely clean which can change your answer. this change would not seem to be alot though it's not the true or exact answer.