The authors regret that the following errors appeared in the article. In Section 4, at the beginning of Example 2, there should be the text “For p = 4, Q = 10” instead of the text “For p = 3, Q = 20”. In Section 5, the divider 10–34 was missed in the fourth column head in Table 3, in vertical coordinate axis names in Figs. 6–9 and 11, and in deviation values in the text of third paragraph from the end of Subsection 5.1. The measurement unit “J s” was missed in vertical coordinate axis names in Figs. 6, 8, 9, and 11. The values of ur estimate in the third column in Table 3 were wrong. The corrected table and figures are provided below. The corrected text is as follows. “It is evident from Fig. 7 that the curves ξ(v) for the IF&PA are closer to the x-axis than those obtained by the Birge ratio procedure for both normal and uniform distributions. The average values of deviation ξ/10−34 are 1.33 × 10−8 and 1.74 × 10−8 (case of normal distribution), and 3.21 × 10−8 and 3.67 × 10−8 (case of uniform distribution), for the IF&PA and the Birge ratio procedure correspondently. These results denote the higher accuracy of the IF&PA against the Birge ratio procedure.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Electrical and Electronic Engineering