Significant Figures

The record of any measurement is done by using a number that

includes all the digits those are known reliably plus one digit that is
uncertain. The reliable digits plus the one uncertain digit are known as
significant figures or significant digits of the measurement.
Significant figures indicate the precision of any measurement and thus
it depends on the least count of the measuring device.
For example, if a distance is measured with scale having least count
in millimeter (mm), a length of 20.6 centimeter (cm) has three
significant figures 2, 0 and 6. The digit 2, 0 are certain while the digit 6
is uncertain. Thus, 20.6 cm means the length is 20.60 cm 0.5 mm
(0.05 cm) i.e., it lies between 20.55 cm and 20.65 cm.
Determination of Significant Figures
Rules and conventions :
All non-zero digits in a number are significant.
Example: Numbers 0.0000216, 0.0216, 21.6 and 216 have the same
number of significant figures namely three (2, 1, 6).
All zeros between two non-zero digits are significant, no matter
where the decimal point is, if at all.
Example: In the numbers 0.0000206, 0.0206, 20.6 and 206, the zero
lying between the digits 2 and 6 is only significant.
If the number is less than 1, the zeroes on the right of decimal point
but to the left of the first non-zero digit are not significant.
Example: In 0.0000206, the four zeros after decimal and before the

digit 2 has no significance. Similarly, in 0.0206, the zero after decimal

and before the digit 2 has no significance. So the number of
significant figures of these numbers are three (2, 0 and 6).
The terminal or trailing zeros in a number without a decimal point
are significant depending on accuracy of measurement.
Example : In 2360 m, the terminal zero has no significance, if the
accuracy of measurement is 10 m then the number of significant
figures of this number is three (2, 3 and 6). If the accuracy of
measurement is 1 m, the terminal zero is significant figures of this
same number will be four (i.e. 2, 3, 6 & 0).
The digit 0 conventionally put on the left of a decimal for a number
less than 1 is never significant. However, the zeros at the end of such
number are significant in a measurement.
Example: The number 0.120 has three significant numbers. The zero
before the decimal point is not significant.
The terminal or trailing zeros in a number with a decimal point are
significant.
Example: In 23.60 m, the terminal zero has significance, so the
number of significant figures in this number is four (2, 3, 6 and 0).
NOTE
There can be some confusion regarding the trailing zeros. Suppose, a
length is recorded as 4.700 m. It is evident that the zeros here are
meant to convey the precision of measurement and are, therefore,
significant. Now, suppose the unit of the number is changed, i.e,
4.700 m = 470.0 cm = 4700 mm
Since the last number has trailing zeros in a number with no decimal,

it can be concluded erroneously that the number has two significant

figures, while in fact it has four significant figures.
To overcome such ambiguities in determining the number of
significant figures, measurements are to be reported in scientific
notation. In this notation, Every number is expressed as a x 10 b,
where a is a number between 1 and 10, and b is any positive or
negative exponent of 10. It is often customary to write the decimal
after the first digit. The significant number of the base represents the
significant number of the measurement. Thus,
4.700 m = 4.700 x 102 cm = 4.700 x 103 mm = 4.700 x 10-3 km
Each number in this case has four significant figures. Thus, a choice
of change of different units does not change the number of
significant digits or figures in a measurement.
Rounding off Numbers
The dropping of the excess digits in any number is being carried out
by rounding off numbers to the appropriate significant figures. The
rules for rounding off numbers are as follows:
The preceding digit is raised by 1 if the last insignificant digit to be
dropped is more than 5 and left unchanged if the latter is less than 5.
For example (i) 4.796 becomes 4.80 (ii) 8.512 becomes 8.51.
If the digit to be dropped is 5, the preceding digit should be nearest
even number.
For example
(i) 4.745 (after rounding off to three significant digits) becomes 4.74
(ii) 4.735 (after rounding off to three significant digits) becomes 4.74.

Rounding off and Significant Figures in Arithmetic Operations

The arithmetic calculation involving observed/measured quantities
should be such that the resulted quantity cannot be more precise
than the original observed/measured values. Thus, the final result
should not have more significant figures than the original data from
which it has been derived.
In order to achieve such result, following rules for arithmetic
operations are required to be followed:
In addition or subtraction, the final result should be rounded off in
such a way as to retain as many decimal places as are there in the
original number with the least decimal places.

In multiplication or division, the final result should be rounded off in

such a way as to retain as many significant figures as there are in
the original number with the least significant figures.
For example
(i) 6.7153 x 4.67 = 31.360451 = 31.4 (Rounded off to three significant
figures)
(ii) (86.85 x 104)2 = 7542.9225 x 108 = 754.3 x 109 (Rounded off to four

significant figures)

(iii)

= 186.499 = 186 (Rounded off to three significant figures)

Error in Measurement
In case of repeated observation of any parameter, usually it has
been found to have variations, however small, in the resulting
measurement. Moreover, there is nothing definite in the amount of
variation i.e., variations are random in nature. Thus, a measurement
usually differs from its true value. The difference between a
measured and its true value is called the measurement error. Thus,
if x is a given measurement and x t is the true value, then the error e
is given by
e=x-x

Error = measured value true value.

If an estimated value of xt is usually known and is denoted by x1.
Then, an estimate of error for a measurement value x of the
parameter is obtained as
e1 = x - x1
However, correction is the term more popularly being used to define
the magnitude of error but opposite in sign. Thus, rearranging the
error relation,
correction = (-e1) = x1 - x
Or, correction = (estimated / designated) true value - measured
value.

Sources of Errors in Measurement

Depending on sources of origin, errors in measurements fall into
three classes. They are

Natural Errors

Instrumental Errors

Personal Errors

Natural Errors
These are caused due to variations in nature i.e., variations in wind,
temperature, humidity, refraction, gravity and magnetic field of the
earth.
Instrumental Errors
These result from imperfection in the construction or adjustment of
surveying instruments, and movement of their individual parts.
Personal Errors
These arise from limitations of the human senses of sight, touch and
hearing
Errors are traditionally been classified into three types.

Gross Error

Systematic Error

Random Error

Gross Error
Gross errors, also known as blunders or mistakes, are results from

Carelessness on the part of observer in taking or recording

reading;

Faults in equipments;

Adoption of wrong technique.

Misinterpretation.

The blunders or mistakes result into large errors and thus can easily
be detected by comparing with other types of errors (generally small
in value). The maximum permissible error in an observation is 3.29
s (where s is the standard deviation of sample distribution) and is
used to separate mistakes or blunders from the random errors. If any
error

deviates

from

the

mean

by

more

than

the

maximum

permissible error, it is considered as a gross error and the

measurement is rejected.
After mistakes have been detected and eliminated from the
measurements, the remaining errors are usually classified either as
systematic or random error depending on the characteristics of
errors.
Systematic Error
Systematic errors occur according to a system. These errors follow
a definite pattern. Thus, if an experiment is repeated, under the
same conditions, same pattern of systematic errors reoccur. These
errors are dependent on the observer, the instrument used, and on
the physical environment of the experiment. Any change in one or
more of the elements of the system will cause a change in the
character of the systematic error. Depending on the value and sign

of errors in successive observation, systematic errors are divided

into two types.

Cumulative Error

Compensating Error

Systematic errors are dealt with mathematically using functional

relationships or models.
Cumulative Error
If the sign in error remains the same throughout the measuring
process, the error will go on accumulating all throughout the
process. This type of systematic error is termed as cumulative
error.
Compensating Error
If the sign of the systematic error changes, the resulting
systematic error is termed as compensating error.
Random Error
After mistakes are eliminated and systematic errors are corrected,
a survey measurement is associated with random error only. This
error is small and is equally liable to be plus or minus thus partly
compensating in nature. Random errors are unpredictable and they
cannot be evaluated or quantified exactly.
Random errors are determined through statistical analysis based
on following assumptions :

Small variations from the mean value occur more frequently

than large ones.

Positive and negative variations of the same size are about

equal in frequency, rendering their distribution symmetrical
about a mean value.

Very large variations seldom occur.

Thus, to eliminate random error in a measurement, observations

are repeated for number of times. The mean (average) of
observations is considered to be the true (or estimated) value of
the measurement. Normal or Gaussian distribution typifies the
distribution of samples of any measurement.
Propagation of Error
Measurements are used for calculation of different parameters.
As the measurements are fraught with errors, it is important to
know

how

operations.

these

errors

combine

in

various

mathematical

Reliability of Measurement
The reliability of a measurement designates its worth as a
measurement value. Since, the true magnitude of a measured
quantity is never determinable; its worth is ascertained by making
use of reliability indicators. Standard deviation works as an indicator
of reliability of a set of observation and uncertainty associated with
an observation in the set provides an indicator of its reliability.

Uncertainty
An indicator to define the reliability, of any observation in a set of
repeated observations. Figure 7.1 represents the uncertainty involved
in

an

within (

observation.

For

represents the mean and

) [where

example,

if

an

observation

falls

the standard

deviation of the set of the observations] then the observation lies

within 68.3% errors of the set of observation. Thus, 68.3% is
designated as the uncertainty of the sample.
To ascertain the reliability of an observation, it is required to find
within what percentage of error a particular observation lies. This
defines the uncertainty of the observation and consequently its
reliability. Lower the percentage of error within which a particular
observation lies, lower is its uncertainty and thus greater is its
reliability.
For example, an observation is 50% uncertain if it lies within
0.6745
1.645
99%
2.576

and

+ 0.6745

; 90% uncertain if lies in

; 95% uncertain if it is within

uncertain for observation
, (Figure 7.1).

lying

- 1.960
within

-1.645

and
-

and

+ 1.960
2.576

and

and
+

Example : A distance of 10 m is measured having 95 percent error as

0.98 cm. Determine the uncertainly associated with an observation
10.05 m for this distance.
Solution : 95 percent equivalent to 1.96

. Hence, 0.98 = 1.96

5 cm. Given 10.05 = 10 m + 0.05 m = 10m (5cm (i.e.

or,

) uncertainly

involved in 10.05 m is 50 %.
Quality of a measurement having a set of repeated observations is
being tested by using indicators like

Accuracy

Precision

Relative Precision

Accuracy
The accuracy of a set of repeated observations is being defined as
amount of closeness of their mean to the population or distribution
mean, i.e., closeness of the mean of observations to the true value.

Degree Of Accuracy
The degree of accuracy indicates the accuracy attained in the
measurements. It is usually expressed as the ratio of the error and
the associated measured value. For example, a degree of accuracy of
1 in 10,000 indicates that there is an error of 1 unit in 10,000 units of
measured / observed value.

Order Of Accuracy
The minimum degree of accuracy required for a particular survey and
the range of the allowed degree of accuracy is known as order of
accuracy. The most accurate work is designated as the work of the
first order accuracy. The work of the second order accuracy is less
accurate than that of the first order accuracy. Likewise, the work of
the third order accuracy and the fourth order accuracy are less
accurate than that of the second order and the third order accuracy,
respectively.
For example, the following standard of accuracy may be expected for

the horizontal distances for a particular survey.

First order accuracy 1/25,000
Second order accuracy 1/10,000
Third order accuracy 1/5,000
Precision
Precision pertains to the degree of closeness of observations among
each other in a set of repeated observations of a measurement. Thus,
if a set of observations for the same parameter are clustered together,
i.e.,observations have small deviations from their sample mean, then
the observations are said to have been obtained with high precision.
Relative Precision
Relative precision is defined as a ratio of the precision of a given
measurement and the value of the measurement itself. Thus, if d is a
measured

distance,

and

sd is

the

standard

deviation

of

the

measurement, then the relative precision is sd / d. It is expressed as

percentage or a fractional ratio such as 1 / 500 or by parts per million
(ppm)

Ex7-2 Observations for the distance between two points are found to
be as follows
Set I : 165.485 0.005 m; Set II : 165.465 0.010 m.
(i) State which of these sets of observation is more reliable and why?
(ii) State whether the sets of observation are significantly different or
not. Explain
(iii) Find the weighted mean of observation.
Solution :
(i) The standard deviation of Set I is less than that of Set II. Thus, Set I
observation is more reliable than Set II.
(ii) Difference between observations in Set I. & Set II is
165.485 165.465 = 0.020m

Thus
than 2

the
diff

difference

between

the

sets

of

observation

in

less

(i.e., 0.020 < 0.02236). Therefore sets I & II can be regarded

as value measurements of the same quantity and inspection indicates

that they can be combined to find the (weights) mean of observations.
(iii) The weighted mean of observations are :

Therefore, The weighted mean value of the distance is 165.481m