Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Oct 22.
Published in final edited form as: Metrologia. 2017;54(1A):https://doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/54/1a/06011.
Uncertainty contributions due to Evaluation method Relative standard uncert. × 104 Comments
18F 64Cu
Counting statistics A 9 12 Counting statistics: Typical standard deviation of the mean for repeated activity determinations (N = 7 or 57 for 18F; N = 45 to 102 for 64Cu) on a single source on a single measurement run (averaged over 2 sources for 18F; average of 4 runs with 3 sources; one source measured on two occasions, with recovered activity consistent to 0.03 % for 64Cu)
Between source variance A 0.3 34 Standard deviation on the activities determined for multiple sources
Model uncertainty B 28 32 Estimated by combining the typical difference on the activities recovered with a linear and a quadratic extrapolation (0.27 % for 18F; 0.32 % for 64Cu) with the standard deviation of intercept values obtained with different gamma gates for 18F or the standard deviation on the activity recovered from a linear extrapolation using domains of N = 7 to 12 efficiency points (0.06 %) for 64Cu.
Mass determinations B 5 5
Live time B 10 10 Estimated based on previous work
Background B 3 10 Estimated by propagating the standard deviation of the mean for repeated (N = 10) measurements of the matched blank
Impurities B 0 6 Based on HPGe measurements and estimates for LS efficiency
Half-life B 8 2 From DDEP, T1/2(18F) = 1.82890(23) h; T1/2(64Cu) = 12.7004(20) h
β+ branching ratio B 20 From DDEP, 0.9686(19)
Relative combined standard uncertainty 38 51