How would you consider that? The article states that all the calculations were based on the ANSUR-II dataset. If the values in that dataset were wrong, of course the results of the calculations may not be correct.
That's not really how measurements work though. All real-world measurements have precision associated with them. It's not a matter of measurements being correct or being wrong.
As GP hints at, since you don't measure an arm the same way you measure an ear, it's reasonable to expect the errors to have different characteristics.
Of course we can expect errors, I don't doubt that. That's what I mean with "wrong". But still, how should the author consider that if he doesn't know about the precision nor quantity of errors?
I just don't think that's the topic of the article. The article is about correlations in the dataset, no matter, if the dataset may contain errors.
marginalia_nu|2 years ago
As GP hints at, since you don't measure an arm the same way you measure an ear, it's reasonable to expect the errors to have different characteristics.
ckdot2|2 years ago
crackedbassoon|2 years ago