The Evaluation of the Intercomparison Exercise for SO2, CO, O3, NO and NO2 - April 2008

In April 2008 in Ispra (IT), 8 AQUILA (Network of European Air Quality Reference Laboratories) laboratories met at an intercomparison exercise to evaluate their proficiency in the analysis of inorganic gaseous pollutants covered by European Air Quality Directives (SO2, CO, NO, NO2 and O3). The proficiency evaluation, where each participant¿s bias was compared to two criteria, provides information on the current situation and capabilities to the European Commission and can be used by participants in their quality control system. In terms of criteria imposed by the European Commission, 80% of the results reported by AQUILA laboratories were good both in terms of measured values and reported uncertainties. Another 18% of the results had good measured values, but the reported uncertainties were either too small (7%) or too high (11%). The comparability of results among AQUILA participants is satisfactory for all studied measurement methods.JRC.H.4-Transport and air qualit

The Evaluation of the Intercomparison Exercise for SO2, CO, O3, NO and NO2 - 6 - 9 October 2008

From the 6th to the 9th of October 2008 in Ispra (IT), 7 AQUILA (Network of European Air Quality Reference Laboratories) and 2 laboratories of the World Health Organisations (WHO) Euro-Region met at an intercomparison exercise to evaluate their proficiency in the analysis of inorganic gaseous pollutants covered by European Air Quality Directives (SO2, CO, NO, NO2 and O3). The proficiency evaluation, where each participant¿s bias was compared to two criteria, provides information on the current situation and capabilities to the European Commission and can be used by participants in their quality control system. In terms of criteria imposed by the European Commission, 36% of the results reported by AQUILA laboratories were good both in terms of measured values and reported uncertainties. Another 56% of the results had good measured values, but the reported uncertainties were either too small (21%) or too high (35%). The comparability of results among AQUILA participants is satisfactory for O3, SO2, CO and NO measurement method, but the pollutant NO2 needs further improvements and harmonization programmes.JRC.H.4-Transport and air qualit

The Evaluation of the Intercomparison Exercise for SO2, CO, O3, NO and NO2 - 13 - 16 October 2008

From the 13th to the 16th of October 2008 in Ispra (IT), 5 AQUILA (Network of European Air Quality Reference Laboratories) and 2 laboratories of the World Health Organisations (WHO) Euro-Region met at an intercomparison exercise to evaluate their proficiency in the analysis of inorganic gaseous pollutants covered by European Air Quality Directives (SO2, CO, NO, NO2 and O3). The proficiency evaluation, where each participant¿s bias was compared to two criteria, provides information on the current situation and capabilities to the European Commission and can be used by participants in their quality control system. In terms of criteria imposed by the European Commission, 44% of the results reported by AQUILA laboratories were good both in terms of measured values and reported uncertainties. Another 56% of the results had good measured values, but the reported uncertainties were either too small (56%) or too high (2%). The comparability of results among AQUILA participants is satisfactory for O3, CO, NO2 and NO measurement method, but the pollutant SO2 needs further improvements and harmonization programmes.JRC.H.4-Transport and air qualit

The Evaluation of the Intercomparison Exercise for SO2, CO, O3, NO and NO2 Carried out in October 2007 in Essen

In October 2007 in Essen (DE), 13 AQUILA and 5 WHO-EURO laboratories met at intercomparison exercise to evaluate their proficiency in the analysis of inorganic gaseous pollutants covered by European Air Quality Directives (SO2, CO, NO, NO2 and O3). The proficiency evaluation, where each participant¿s bias was compared to two criteria, provides information on current situation to European Commission and can be used by participants in their QA/QC. In terms of criteria imposed by European Commission, 65% of results reported by AQUILA laboratories were good both in terms of measured values and reported uncertainties while another 32% of results had good measured values but the reported uncertainties were either too small (5%) or too big (27%). The comparability of results among AQUILA participants is satisfactory for O3, SO2, CO and NO measurement method but not for NO2 where further harmonization is needed.JRC.H.4-Transport and air qualit

The Evaluation of the Interlaboratory Comparison Exercise for SO2, CO, O3, NO and NO2 19.- 22. October 2009

From the 19th to the 22nd of October 2009 in Ispra (IT), 8 Laboratories of AQUILA (Network of European Air Quality Reference Laboratories) met at an interlaboratory comparison exercise to evaluate their proficiency in the analysis of inorganic gaseous pollutants covered by European Air Quality Directives (SO2, CO, NO, NO2 and O3). The proficiency evaluation, where each participant¿s bias was compared to two criteria, provides information on the current situation and capabilities to the European Commission and can be used by participants in their quality control system. In terms of criteria imposed by the European Commission, 85% of the results reported by AQUILA laboratories were good both in terms of measured values and reported uncertainties. Another 14% of the results had good measured values, but the reported uncertainties were either too high (6%) or too small (8%). The comparability of results among AQUILA participants is satisfactory for O3, CO and NO measurement methods. This is not the case for SO2 and NO2 which comparability in the present exercise is not satisfactory with respect to the settled quality criteria.JRC.DDG.H.4-Transport and air qualit

The Evaluation of the Intercomparison Exercise for SO2, CO, O3, NO and NO2 - June 2007

In June 2007 in Ispra (IT), 9 AQUILA (Network of European Air Quality Reference Laboratories) laboratories and one laboratory of the World Health Organisations (WHO) Euro-Region met at an intercomparison exercise to evaluate their proficiency in the analysis of inorganic gaseous pollutants covered by European Air Quality Directives (SO2, CO, NO, NO2 and O3). The proficiency evaluation, where each participant¿s bias was compared to two criteria, provides information on the current situation and capabilities to the European Commission and can be used by participants in their quality control system. In terms of criteria imposed by the European Commission, 60% of the results reported by AQUILA laboratories were good both in terms of measured values and reported uncertainties. Another 37% of the results had good measured values, but the reported uncertainties were either too small (4%) or too high (33%). The comparability of results among AQUILA participants is satisfactory for O3, SO2, CO and NO measurement method, but the pollutant NO2 needs further improvements and harmonization programmes.JRC.H.4-Transport and air qualit

The evaluation of the interlaboratory comparison exercise for SO2, CO, O3, NO and NO2 14-17 June 2010

From the 14th to the 17th of June 2010 in Ispra (IT), 9 Laboratories of AQUILA (Network of European Air Quality Reference Laboratories) met at an interlaboratory comparison exercise to evaluate their proficiency in the analysis of inorganic gaseous pollutants covered by European Directive about air quality (SO2, CO, NO, NO2 and O3). The proficiency evaluation, where each participant’s bias was compared to two criteria, provides information on the current situation and capabilities to the European Commission and can be used by participants in their quality control system. On the basis of criteria imposed by the European Commission, 85% of the results reported by AQUILA laboratories were good both in terms of measured values and reported uncertainties. Another 12% of the results had good measured values, but the reported uncertainties were either too high (8%) or too small (4%). Comparability of results among AQUILA participants at the highest concentration level, excluding outliers, is acceptable in NO, CO and O3 measurements while NO2 and SO2 measurement methods showed less satisfactory results.JRC.H.2-Climate change and air qualit

Second EC-JRC Aromatic Compounds Intercomparison with Automatic Analyzer

This report presents the results of the second intercomparison for BTEX automatic analysers carried out by the JRC on the 17-19 June 2008. Seven national reference laboratories participated in this exercise. Six concentrations levels were tested during the intercomparison, ranging from circa 3 to 50 µg/m3, for benzene. With respect to the first intercomparison carried out in 2005, the reference value was assigned by ERLAP and the exercise was evaluated according to ISO 13528 methodologies for the evaluation of interlaboratory proficiency assessment and the recommendation of the protocol N37 of the AQUILA network. Participating laboratories are identified as requested by the AQUILA for further actions. In general, the results of the exercise show no changes in the performance of the method with respect to the previous exercise. The robustness of the method is still an issue in particular for benzene. This is reflected in a relatively high interlaboratory reproducibility standard deviation. As a consequence, the criterion for the standard deviation for proficiency assessment proposed in the AQUILA protocol seems to be very restrictive for the current performance of the methodology, this may require future harmonisation actions in the implemented methodology.JRC.H.4-Transport and air qualit

On Certainty Within and Without Language

V sklopu magistrske naloge se bom osredotočil na globljo obravnavo Wittgensteinovega dela O gotovosti. Wittgensteinova preokupacija skozi njegovo celotno življenje je bila jezik in zarisovanje njegovih meja, pri čemer so se njegovi pristopi tekom časa spreminjali. Kljub temu da, kakor pravi tudi sam, meja nikoli ne more biti polno zarisana, ostrina v njenem izražanju, kot se pojavi v času njegovega zadnjega življenjskega obdobja, doseže zavidljivo jasnost. Raziskati želim njegov odnos do jezika v tem zadnjem življenjskem obdobju. Čeprav v tem času nastane več del, trdim, da se ta odnos najbolj izraža v delu O gotovosti. S tem v mislih bom v pregled vzel zgodovinske vidike pojma gotovosti in mislece, ki jih je Wittgenstein sam bral, ali pa so mu bili blizu. Nato se bom obrnil k obravnavi pojma s strani Wittgensteina samega. Kot temeljna v njegovem pojmovanju se pokaže razlika med znanjem in gotovim prepričanjem, pri čemer pa v samem jedru gotovosti vlada nepropozicionalnost. Z drugimi besedami, v končnem smislu je zanj gotovost najbolj razvidna v dejanjih. Trdim, da za Wittgensteina sama meja, ki ločuje rabo jezika od dejanja, označuje formo, skozi katero edino lahko filozofiramo. Cilj naloge bo povzetek zgodovinskih in idejnih razsežnosti dela, s čimer upam nakazati smer forme filozofiranja, kakor se pojavi v teh zapisih.In this magisterial thesis I will focus on a closer inspection of Wittgenstein\u27s work On Certainty. Wittgenstein\u27s preoccupation throughout his entire life was language and its limits, with a variety of differences to his approach through time. Despite the fact that, as he himself has said, a limit to language cannot be properly expressed, the sharpness with which it is elucidated in his final stage of life is something to be envied. I intend to explore his relationship to language in this, final period. While several other of his works can be attributed to this time, I will focus on his On Certainty, as I believe it is a text expressing some of the most crucial ideas. With this in mind I will conduct an analysis of the historic views of certainty and some of the figures that Wittgenstein himself read or were close to him. Following this I will turn to an analysis of the use of the term by Wittgenstein himself. The difference between knowledge and certain belief will show itself as one of the core ideas of his conception, based on an idea of non-propositionality of certainty. In other words, certainty for Wittgenstein is most readily expressed in action. For Wittgenstein, the limit itself, which differentiates the use of language from action is the sole form through which we may practice philosophy. The goal of this work will be a summary of historic and some of the conceptual dimensions of the book, with which I hope to point at the direction of the form of philosophy as it shows itself in these notes