Chemistry

Problem

A least-squares analysis of calibration data collected in a 1.00 cm cuvette yields

A=(1.12\pm0.04)\times10^{4}c

with

R^{2}=0.998

. Literature reports

\varepsilon=1.10\times10^{4}\;\text{L\,mol}^{-1}\,\text{cm}^{-1}

at the same wavelength. Which conclusion is most strongly supported by these results? a) The discrepancy between experimental and literature values is best explained by a systematic error in the cuvette path length, which made the effective path longer than

1.00\,\text{cm}

. b) The data set is unreliable; an

R^{2}

below

0.999

is insufficient to validate the molar absorptivity. c) The experimental value of molar absorptivity agrees with the literature value within the stated uncertainty. d) The

200\,\text{L\,mol}^{-1}\,\text{cm}^{-1}

difference between the two values greatly exceeds the stated

\pm0.04

uncertainty, so the disagreement is statistically significant.

Browse the problem library