Methods for Characterizing Variability and Uncertainty: Comparison of Bootstrap Simulation and Likelihood‐Based Approaches

Variability arises due to differences in the value of a quantity among different members of a population. Uncertainty arises due to lack of knowledge regarding the true value of a quantity for a given member of a population. We describe and evaluate two methods for quantifying both variability and uncertainty. These methods, bootstrapsimulation and a likelihood‐based method, are applied to three datasets. The datasetsinclude a synthetic sample of 19 values from a Lognormal distribution, a sample of nine values obtained from measurements of the PCB concentration in leafy produce, and asample of five values for the partitioning of chromium in the flue gas desulfurization system of coal‐fired power plants. For each of these datasets, we employ the two methods to characterize uncertainty in the arithmetic mean and standard deviation, cumulative distribution functions based upon fitted parametric distributions, the 95th percentile of variability, and the 63rd percentile of uncertainty for the 81st percentile of variability. The latter is intended to show that it is possible to describe anypoint within the uncertain frequency distribution by specifying an uncertainty percentile and a Variability percentile. Using the bootstrap method, we compare results based upon use of the method of matching moments and the method of maximum likelihood for fitting distributions to data. Our results indicate that with only 5‐19 data pointsas in the datasets we have evaluated, there is substantial uncertainty based upon random sampling error. Both the boostrap and likelihood‐based approaches yield comparable uncertainty estimates in most cases.