 |
 |
It was noted on the list in December that "5 sigma" verification was used as jargon for claiming a generally-believed (non-chance) result in physics. Here is another curious phrase from Science (Vol 334 25 Nov 2011 p118) in a paper on archaeology: "Dates were calibrated to 2[letter sigma] with the program OxCal ...". The accompanying table has a column for age, eg 3245+/-39, and an adjacent column for "C14 2sigma cal yr BP", given as 3562-3385. My guess is this is a ham-fisted way of saying the first column is the direct C14 measured age, which was adjusted using a calibration curve to the second which is their 95% confidence interval. I also guess the units digit is quite random and should be rounded to 10s. Allan This email and any attachments are intended for the named recipient only. Its unauthorised use, distribution, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you have received it in error, please destroy all copies and notify the sender. In messages of a non-business nature, the views and opinions expressed are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of Cefas. Communications on Cefas’ computer systems may be monitored and/or recorded to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes. You may leave the list at any time by sending the command SIGNOFF allstat to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.