quantile method overestimates m and s (average of + 48 percent, range:
.

to + 160 percent, O-15 cm soil).

For

137

.

Cs with few measurements below

-

the MDA, the differences between methods are smaller.

For

137

Cs 0-15

cm soil measurements the arithmetic mean, x, underestimates -5 percent
(range: 32 percent to +6 percent), and for the quantile method, x
averages 21 percent lower (range -50 percent to 0 percent).

As we can

see (Table 46), radionuclide concentration data above the MDA the
arithmetic averages make“a good approximation to the Krige mean for
coefficient of variation c, averaging 0.9 (range: 0.6 to 1.5).

Recently,

White4] found the arithmetic mean to have a 75 percent efficiency for

‘coefficients of variation, c, less than 2.

Tnis efficiency is also show

by Aitchison and Brown .34
The value of the

shifting parameter can be seen fror Tables 45 anc

46 to be roughly equal to the MDA velues of Z4las (0.2 to 1.5 pci/gz)
and 137¢e (0,1 pCi/gm).
MDA,

set

to MDA.

Both of these data sets have values less than

Similar analysis

negative values of T.

The 1376.

on unaltered data exhibits

lower

or

values (Table 46) are seen on

samples Enjebi (Janet) NE and Kidrinen (Lucy) to be unreasonably large,
and without physical basis.

The improvement in lognormal fit wes

marginal and the T could have been set to zero; however,

the Krige method

is fairly insensitive to T as illustrated by example, 29 anc as our
tests have also shown.
The computer computational codes were tested with artificial lognormal samples.

A 105 term approximation4? generated by a rectangular

distributed psuedo-random generator produced these artifical sarcpies.

Testing samples numbers ranged from 4 to 255.

41 -

a

5011120

Ps

OF D>
eat

4]

/

e k yb eee

ec KY
Pia vys
Z

Select target paragraph3