Hubbry Logo
Significant figuresSignificant figuresMain
Open search
Significant figures
Community hub
Significant figures
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Significant figures
Significant figures
from Wikipedia

Significant figures, also referred to as significant digits, are specific digits within a number that is written in positional notation that carry both reliability and necessity in conveying a particular quantity. When presenting the outcome of a measurement (such as length, pressure, volume, or mass), if the number of digits exceeds what the measurement instrument can resolve, only the digits that are determined by the resolution are dependable and therefore considered significant.

For instance, if a length measurement yields 114.8 millimetres (mm), using a ruler with the smallest interval between marks at 1 mm, the first three digits (1, 1, and 4, representing 114 mm) are certain and constitute significant figures. Further, digits that are uncertain yet meaningful are also included in the significant figures. In this example, the last digit (8, contributing 0.8 mm) is likewise considered significant despite its uncertainty.[1] Therefore, this measurement contains four significant figures.

Another example involves a volume measurement of 2.98 litres (L) with an uncertainty of ± 0.05 L. The actual volume falls between 2.93 L and 3.03 L. Even if certain digits are not completely known, they are still significant if they are meaningful, as they indicate the actual volume within an acceptable range of uncertainty. In this case, the actual volume might be 2.94 L or possibly 3.02 L, so all three digits are considered significant.[1] Thus, there are three significant figures in this example.

The following types of digits are not considered significant:[2]

  • Leading zeros. For instance, 013 kg has two significant figures—1 and 3—while the leading zero is insignificant since it does not impact the mass indication; 013 kg is equivalent to 13 kg, rendering the zero unnecessary. Similarly, in the case of 0.056 m, there are two insignificant leading zeros since 0.056 m is the same as 56 mm, thus the leading zeros do not contribute to the length indication.
  • Trailing zeros when they serve as placeholders. In the measurement 1500 m, when the measurement resolution is 100 m, the trailing zeros are insignificant as they simply stand for the tens and ones places. In this instance, 1500 m indicates the length is approximately 1500 m rather than an exact value of 1500 m.
  • Spurious digits that arise from calculations resulting in a higher precision than the original data or a measurement reported with greater precision than the instrument's resolution.

A zero after a decimal (e.g., 1.0) is significant, and care should be used when appending such a decimal of zero. Thus, in the case of 1.0, there are two significant figures, whereas 1 (without a decimal) has one significant figure.

Among a number's significant digits, the most significant digit is the one with the greatest exponent value (the leftmost significant digit/figure), while the least significant digit is the one with the lowest exponent value (the rightmost significant digit/figure). For example, in the number "123" the "1" is the most significant digit, representing hundreds (102), while the "3" is the least significant digit, representing ones (100).

To avoid conveying a misleading level of precision, numbers are often rounded. For instance, it would create false precision to present a measurement as 12.34525 kg when the measuring instrument only provides accuracy to the nearest gram (0.001 kg). In this case, the significant figures are the first five digits (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) from the leftmost digit, and the number should be rounded to these significant figures, resulting in 12.345 kg as the accurate value. The rounding error (in this example, 0.00025 kg = 0.25 g) approximates the numerical resolution or precision. Numbers can also be rounded for simplicity, not necessarily to indicate measurement precision, such as for the sake of expediency in news broadcasts.

Significance arithmetic encompasses a set of approximate rules for preserving significance through calculations. More advanced scientific rules are known as the propagation of uncertainty.

Radix 10 (base-10, decimal numbers) is assumed in the following. (See Unit in the last place for extending these concepts to other bases.)

Identifying significant figures

[edit]

Rules to identify significant figures in a number

[edit]
Digits in light blue are significant figures; those in black are not.

Identifying the significant figures in a number requires knowing which digits are meaningful, which requires knowing the resolution with which the number is measured, obtained, or processed. For example, if the measurable smallest mass is 0.001 g, then in a measurement given as 0.00234 g the "4" is not useful and should be discarded, while the "3" is useful and should often be retained.[3]

  • Non-zero digits within the given measurement or reporting resolution are significant.
    • 91 has two significant figures (9 and 1) if they are measurement-allowed digits.
    • 123.45 has five significant digits (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) if they are within the measurement resolution. If the resolution is, say, 0.1, then the 5 shows that the true value to 4 significant figures is equally likely to be 123.4 or 123.5.
  • Zeros between two significant non-zero digits are significant (significant trapped zeros).
    • 101.12003 consists of eight significant figures if the resolution is to 0.00001.
    • 125.340006 has seven significant figures if the resolution is to 0.0001: 1, 2, 5, 3, 4, 0, and 0.
  • Zeros to the left of the first non-zero digit (leading zeros) are not significant.
    • If a length measurement gives 0.052 km, then 0.052 km = 52 m so 5 and 2 are only significant; the leading zeros appear or disappear, depending on which unit is used, so they are not necessary to indicate the measurement scale.
    • 0.00034 has 2 significant figures (3 and 4) if the resolution is 0.00001.
  • Zeros to the right of the last non-zero digit (trailing zeros) in a number with the decimal point are significant if they are within the measurement or reporting resolution.
    • 1.200 has four significant figures (1, 2, 0, and 0) if they are allowed by the measurement resolution.
    • 0.0980 has three significant digits (9, 8, and the last zero) if they are within the measurement resolution.
    • 120.000 consists of six significant figures (1, 2, and the four subsequent zeroes) if, as before, they are within the measurement resolution.
  • Trailing zeros in an integer may or may not be significant, depending on the measurement or reporting resolution.
    • 45600 has 3, 4 or 5 significant figures depending on how the last zeros are used. For example, if the length of a road is reported as 45600 m without information about the reporting or measurement resolution, then it is not clear if the road length is precisely measured as 45600 m or if it is a rough estimate. If it is the rough estimation, then only the first three non-zero digits are significant since the trailing zeros are neither reliable nor necessary; 45600 m can be expressed as 45.6 km or as 4.56×104 m in scientific notation, and neither expression requires the trailing zeros.
  • An exact number has an infinite number of significant figures.
    • If the number of apples in a bag is 4 (exact number), then this number is 4.0000... (with infinite trailing zeros to the right of the decimal point). As a result, 4 does not impact the number of significant figures or digits in the result of calculations with it.
    • The Planck constant is defined as exactly h = 6.62607015×10−34 J⋅s.[4]
  • A mathematical or physical constant has significant figures to its known digits.
    • π is a specific real number with several equivalent definitions. All of the digits in its exact decimal expansion 3.14159... are significant. Although many properties of these digits are known – for example, they do not repeat, because π is irrational – not all of the digits are known. As of March 2024, more than 102 trillion digits[5] have been calculated. A 102 trillion-digit approximation has 102 trillion significant digits. In practical applications, far fewer digits are used. The everyday approximation 3.14 has three significant figures and 7 correct binary digits. The approximation 22/7 has the same three correct decimal digits but has 10 correct binary digits. Most calculators and computer programs can handle a 16-digit approximation sufficient for interplanetary navigation calculations.[6]

Ways to denote significant figures in an integer with trailing zeros

[edit]

The significance of trailing zeros in a number not containing a decimal point can be ambiguous. For example, it may not always be clear if the number 1300 is precise to the nearest unit (just happens coincidentally to be an exact multiple of a hundred) or if it is only shown to the nearest hundreds due to rounding or uncertainty. Many conventions exist to address this issue. However, these are not universally used and would only be effective if the reader is familiar with the convention:

  • An overline, sometimes also called an overbar, or less accurately, a vinculum, may be placed over the last significant figure; any trailing zeros following this are insignificant. For example, 1300 has three significant figures (and hence indicates that the number is precise to the nearest ten).
  • Less often, using a closely related convention, the last significant figure of a number may be underlined; for example, "1300" has two significant figures.
  • A decimal point may be placed after the number; for example "1300." indicates specifically that trailing zeros are meant to be significant.[7]

As the conventions above are not in general use, the following more widely recognized options are available for indicating the significance of number with trailing zeros:

  • Eliminate ambiguous or non-significant zeros by changing the unit prefix in a number with a unit of measurement. For example, the precision of measurement specified as 1300 g is ambiguous, while if stated as 1.30 kg it is not. Likewise 0.0123 L can be rewritten as 12.3 mL.
  • Eliminate ambiguous or non-significant zeros by using Scientific Notation: For example, 1300 with three significant figures becomes 1.30×103. Likewise 0.0123 can be rewritten as 1.23×10−2. The part of the representation that contains the significant figures (1.30 or 1.23) is known as the significand or mantissa. The digits in the base and exponent (103 or 10−2) are considered exact numbers so for these digits, significant figures are irrelevant.
  • Explicitly state the number of significant figures (the abbreviation s.f. is sometimes used): For example "20 000 to 2 s.f." or "20 000 (2 sf)".
  • State the expected variability (precision) explicitly with a plus–minus sign, as in 20 000 ± 1%. This also allows specifying a range of precision in-between powers of ten.

Rounding to significant figures

[edit]

Rounding to significant figures is a more general-purpose technique than rounding to n digits, since it handles numbers of different scales in a uniform way. For example, the population of a city might only be known to the nearest thousand and be stated as 52,000, while the population of a country might only be known to the nearest million and be stated as 52,000,000. The former might be in error by hundreds, and the latter might be in error by hundreds of thousands, but both have two significant figures (5 and 2). This reflects the fact that the significance of the error is the same in both cases, relative to the size of the quantity being measured.

To round a number to n significant figures:[8][9]

  1. If the n + 1 digit is greater than 5 or is 5 followed by other non-zero digits, add 1 to the n digit. For example, if we want to round 1.2459 to 3 significant figures, then this step results in 1.25.
  2. If the n + 1 digit is 5 not followed by other digits or followed by only zeros, then rounding requires a tie-breaking rule. For example, to round 1.25 to 2 significant figures:
    • Round half away from zero rounds up to 1.3. This is the default rounding method implied in many disciplines[citation needed] if the required rounding method is not specified.
    • Round half to even, which rounds to the nearest even number. With this method, 1.25 is rounded down to 1.2. If this method applies to 1.35, then it is rounded up to 1.4. This is the method preferred by many scientific disciplines, because, for example, it avoids skewing the average value of a long list of values upwards.
  3. For an integer in rounding, replace the digits after the n digit with zeros. For example, if 1254 is rounded to 2 significant figures, then 5 and 4 are replaced to 0 so that it will be 1300. For a number with the decimal point in rounding, remove the digits after the n digit. For example, if 14.895 is rounded to 3 significant figures, then the digits after 8 are removed so that it will be 14.9.

In financial calculations, a number is often rounded to a given number of places. For example, to two places after the decimal separator for many world currencies. This is done because greater precision is immaterial, and usually it is not possible to settle a debt of less than the smallest currency unit.

In UK personal tax returns, income is rounded down to the nearest pound, whilst tax paid is calculated to the nearest penny.

As an illustration, the decimal quantity 12.345 can be expressed with various numbers of significant figures or decimal places. If insufficient precision is available then the number is rounded in some manner to fit the available precision. The following table shows the results for various total precision at two rounding ways (N/A stands for Not Applicable).

Precision Rounded to
significant figures
Rounded to
decimal places
6 12.3450 12.345000
5 12.345 12.34500
4 12.34 or 12.35 12.3450
3 12.3 12.345
2 12 12.34 or 12.35
1 10 12.3
0 12

Another example for 0.012345. (Remember that the leading zeros are not significant.)

Precision Rounded to
significant figures
Rounded to
decimal places
7 0.01234500 0.0123450
6 0.0123450 0.012345
5 0.012345 0.01234 or 0.01235
4 0.01234 or 0.01235 0.0123
3 0.0123 0.012
2 0.012 0.01
1 0.01 0.0
0 0

The representation of a non-zero number x to a precision of p significant digits has a numerical value that is given by the formula:[citation needed]

where

which may need to be written with a specific marking as detailed above to specify the number of significant trailing zeros.

Writing uncertainty and implied uncertainty

[edit]

Significant figures in writing uncertainty

[edit]

It is recommended for a measurement result to include the measurement uncertainty such as , where xbest and σx are the best estimate and uncertainty in the measurement respectively.[10] xbest can be the average of measured values and σx can be the standard deviation or a multiple of the measurement deviation. The rules to write are:[11]

  • σx should usually be quoted to only one or two significant figures, as more precision is unlikely to be reliable or meaningful:
    • 1.79 ± 0.06 (correct), 1.79 ± 0.96 (correct), 1.79 ± 1.96 (incorrect).
  • The digit positions of the last significant figures in xbest and σx are the same, otherwise the consistency is lost. For example, "1.79 ± 0.067" is incorrect, as it does not make sense to have more accurate uncertainty than the best estimate.
    • 1.79 ± 0.06 (correct), 1.79 ± 0.96 (correct), 1.79 ± 0.067 (incorrect).

Implied uncertainty

[edit]
Persnickety sign implies 14.6 is speed violation

Uncertainty may be implied by the last significant figure if it is not explicitly expressed.[1] The implied uncertainty is ± the half of the minimum scale at the last significant figure position. For example, if the mass of an object is reported as 3.78 kg without mentioning uncertainty, then ± 0.005 kg measurement uncertainty may be implied. If the mass of an object is estimated as 3.78 ± 0.07 kg, so the actual mass is probably somewhere in the range 3.71 to 3.85 kg, and it is desired to report it with a single number, then 3.8 kg is the best number to report since its implied uncertainty ± 0.05 kg gives a mass range of 3.75 to 3.85 kg, which is close to the measurement range. If the uncertainty is a bit larger, i.e. 3.78 ± 0.09 kg, then 3.8 kg is still the best single number to quote, since if "4 kg" was reported then a lot of information would be lost.

If there is a need to write the implied uncertainty of a number, then it can be written as with stating it as the implied uncertainty (to prevent readers from recognizing it as the measurement uncertainty), where x and σx are the number with an extra zero digit (to follow the rules to write uncertainty above) and the implied uncertainty of it respectively. For example, 6 kg with the implied uncertainty ± 0.5 kg can be stated as 6.0 ± 0.5 kg.

Arithmetic

[edit]

As there are rules to determine the significant figures in directly measured quantities, there are also guidelines (not rules) to determine the significant figures in quantities calculated from these measured quantities.

Significant figures in measured quantities are most important in the determination of significant figures in calculated quantities with them. A mathematical or physical constant (e.g., π in the formula for the area of a circle with radius r as πr2) has no effect on the determination of the significant figures in the result of a calculation with it if its known digits are equal to or more than the significant figures in the measured quantities used in the calculation. An exact number such as 1/2 in the formula for the kinetic energy of a mass m with velocity v as 1/2mv2 has no bearing on the significant figures in the calculated kinetic energy since its number of significant figures is infinite (0.500000...).

The guidelines described below are intended to avoid a calculation result more precise than the measured quantities, but it does not ensure the resulted implied uncertainty close enough to the measured uncertainties. This problem can be seen in unit conversion. If the guidelines give the implied uncertainty too far from the measured ones, then it may be needed to decide significant digits that give comparable uncertainty.

Multiplication and division

[edit]

For quantities created from measured quantities via multiplication and division, the calculated result should have as many significant figures as the least number of significant figures among the measured quantities used in the calculation.[12] For example,

  • 1.234 × 2 = 2.468 ≈ 2
  • 1.234 × 2.0 = 2.468 ≈ 2.5
  • 0.01234 × 2 = 0.02468 ≈ 0.02
  • 0.012345678 / 0.00234 = 5.2759 ≈ 5.28

with one, two, and one significant figures respectively. (2 here is assumed not an exact number.) For the first example, the first multiplication factor has four significant figures and the second has one significant figure. The factor with the fewest or least significant figures is the second one with only one, so the final calculated result should also have one significant figure.

Exception

[edit]

For unit conversion, the implied uncertainty of the result can be unsatisfactorily higher than that in the previous unit if this rounding guideline is followed; For example, 8 inches has the implied uncertainty of ± 0.5 inch = ± 1.27 cm. If it is converted to the centimeter scale and the rounding guideline for multiplication and division is followed, then 20.32 cm ≈ 20 cm with the implied uncertainty of ± 5 cm. If this implied uncertainty is considered as too overestimated, then more proper significant digits in the unit conversion result may be 20.32 cm ≈ 20. cm with the implied uncertainty of ± 0.5 cm.

Another exception of applying the above rounding guideline is to multiply a number by an integer, such as 1.234 × 9. If the above guideline is followed, then the result is rounded as 1.234 × 9.000.... = 11.106 ≈ 11.11. However, this multiplication is essentially adding 1.234 to itself 9 times such as 1.234 + 1.234 + … + 1.234 so the rounding guideline for addition and subtraction described below is more proper rounding approach.[13] As a result, the final answer is 1.234 + 1.234 + … + 1.234 = 11.106 = 11.106 (one significant digit increase).

Addition and subtraction of significant figures

[edit]

For quantities created from measured quantities via addition and subtraction, the last significant figure position (e.g., hundreds, tens, ones, tenths, hundredths, and so forth) in the calculated result should be the same as the leftmost or largest digit position among the last significant figures of the measured quantities in the calculation. For example,

  • 1.234 + 2 = 3.234 ≈ 3
  • 1.234 + 2.0 = 3.234 ≈ 3.2
  • 0.01234 + 2 = 2.01234 ≈ 2
  • 12000 + 77 = 12077 ≈ 12000

with the last significant figures in the ones place, tenths place, ones place, and thousands place respectively. (2 here is assumed not an exact number.) For the first example, the first term has its last significant figure in the thousandths place and the second term has its last significant figure in the ones place. The leftmost or largest digit position among the last significant figures of these terms is the ones place, so the calculated result should also have its last significant figure in the ones place.

The rule to calculate significant figures for multiplication and division are not the same as the rule for addition and subtraction. For multiplication and division, only the total number of significant figures in each of the factors in the calculation matters; the digit position of the last significant figure in each factor is irrelevant. For addition and subtraction, only the digit position of the last significant figure in each of the terms in the calculation matters; the total number of significant figures in each term is irrelevant.[citation needed] However, greater accuracy will often be obtained if some non-significant digits are maintained in intermediate results which are used in subsequent calculations.[citation needed]

Logarithm and antilogarithm

[edit]

The base-10 logarithm of a normalized number (i.e., a × 10b with 1 ≤ a < 10 and b as an integer), is rounded such that its decimal part (called mantissa) has as many significant figures as the significant figures in the normalized number.

  • log10(3.000 × 104) = log10(104) + log10(3.000) = 4.000000... (exact number so infinite significant digits) + 0.4771212547... = 4.4771212547 ≈ 4.4771.

When taking the antilogarithm of a normalized number, the result is rounded to have as many significant figures as the significant figures in the decimal part of the number to be antiloged.

  • 104.4771 = 29998.5318119... = 30000 = 3.000 × 104.

Transcendental functions

[edit]

If a transcendental function (e.g., the exponential function, the logarithm, and the trigonometric functions) is differentiable at its domain element 'x', then its number of significant figures (denoted as "significant figures of ") is approximately related with the number of significant figures in x (denoted as "significant figures of x") by the formula

,

where is the condition number.

Round only on the final calculation result

[edit]

When performing multiple stage calculations, do not round intermediate stage calculation results; keep as many digits as is practical (at least one more digit than the rounding rule allows per stage) until the end of all the calculations to avoid cumulative rounding errors while tracking or recording the significant figures in each intermediate result. Then, round the final result, for example, to the fewest number of significant figures (for multiplication or division) or leftmost last significant digit position (for addition or subtraction) among the inputs in the final calculation.[14]

  • (2.3494 + 1.345) × 1.2 = 3.6944 × 1.2 = 4.43328 ≈ 4.4.
  • (2.3494 × 1.345) + 1.2 = 3.159943 + 1.2 = 4.359943 ≈ 4.4.

Estimating an extra digit

[edit]

When using a ruler, initially use the smallest mark as the first estimated digit. For example, if a ruler's smallest mark is 0.1 cm, and 4.5 cm is read, then it is 4.5 (±0.1 cm) or 4.4 cm to 4.6 cm as to the smallest mark interval. However, in practice a measurement can usually be estimated by eye to closer than the interval between the ruler's smallest mark, e.g. in the above case it might be estimated as between 4.51 cm and 4.53 cm.[15]

It is also possible that the overall length of a ruler may not be accurate to the degree of the smallest mark, and the marks may be imperfectly spaced within each unit. However assuming a normal good quality ruler, it should be possible to estimate tenths between the nearest two marks to achieve an extra decimal place of accuracy.[16] Failing to do this adds the error in reading the ruler to any error in the calibration of the ruler.

Estimation in statistic

[edit]

When estimating the proportion of individuals carrying some particular characteristic in a population, from a random sample of that population, the number of significant figures should not exceed the maximum precision allowed by that sample size.

Relationship to accuracy and precision in measurement

[edit]

Traditionally, in various technical fields, "accuracy" refers to the closeness of a given measurement to its true value; "precision" refers to the stability of that measurement when repeated many times. Thus, it is possible to be "precisely wrong". Hoping to reflect the way in which the term "accuracy" is actually used in the scientific community, there is a recent standard, ISO 5725, which keeps the same definition of precision but defines the term "trueness" as the closeness of a given measurement to its true value and uses the term "accuracy" as the combination of trueness and precision. (See the accuracy and precision article for a full discussion.) In either case, the number of significant figures roughly corresponds to precision, not to accuracy or the newer concept of trueness.

In computing

[edit]

Computer representations of floating-point numbers use a form of rounding to significant figures (while usually not keeping track of how many), in general with binary numbers. The number of correct significant figures is closely related to the notion of relative error (which has the advantage of being a more accurate measure of precision, and is independent of the radix, also known as the base, of the number system used).

Electronic calculators supporting a dedicated significant figures display mode are relatively rare.

Among the calculators to support related features are the Commodore M55 Mathematician (1976)[17] and the S61 Statistician (1976),[18] which support two display modes, where DISP+n will give n significant digits in total, while DISP+.+n will give n decimal places.

The Texas Instruments TI-83 Plus (1999) and TI-84 Plus (2004) families of graphical calculators support a Sig-Fig Calculator mode in which the calculator will evaluate the count of significant digits of entered numbers and display it in square brackets behind the corresponding number. The results of calculations will be adjusted to only show the significant digits as well.[19]

For the HP 20b/30b-based community-developed WP 34S (2011) and WP 31S (2014) calculators significant figures display modes SIG+n and SIG0+n (with zero padding) are available as a compile-time option.[20][21] The SwissMicros DM42-based community-developed calculators WP 43C (2019)[22] / C43 (2022) / C47 (2023) support a significant figures display mode as well.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Significant figures, also known as significant digits, are the digits in a numerical value that contribute to its precision, indicating the reliability of a or result. They represent all known digits plus one estimated digit, reflecting the accuracy of the measuring instrument or process used. In scientific contexts, significant figures ensure that reported values avoid implying unwarranted precision, such as distinguishing between a measurement of exactly 100 and one known only to two digits as 1.0 × 10². The number of significant figures in a value is determined by specific rules to identify meaningful digits. All non-zero digits are always significant, as are zeros located between non-zero digits (e.g., has four significant figures). Leading zeros, which appear before the first non-zero digit, are not significant (e.g., 0.001 has one significant figure), while trailing zeros after a point are significant (e.g., 1.200 has four significant figures). Trailing zeros in whole numbers without a decimal are ambiguous and typically not considered significant unless specified (e.g., 500 may have one, two, or three significant figures; like 5.00 × 10² clarifies three). In calculations, significant figures guide the reporting of results to maintain appropriate precision. For and division, the result should have the same number of significant figures as the with the fewest significant figures (e.g., 2.5 × 3.42 = 8.6, with two significant figures). For addition and subtraction, the result is limited to the least precise place among the inputs (e.g., 12.52 + 349.0 = 361.5, rounded to one decimal place). These conventions, rooted in , prevent overstatement of accuracy and are essential in fields like chemistry, physics, and for reproducible scientific communication.

Definition and Identification

Definition and Purpose

Significant figures are the digits in a numerical value that carry meaning contributing to its precision, particularly in the context of measurements where they reflect the reliability and known accuracy of the reported . According to the NIST Guide to the SI, these are the digits required to express a ’s magnitude while indicating which are meaningfully precise, helping to avoid ambiguity in scientific communication. For example, the number 123.45 has five significant figures, indicating that the value is precise to the hundredths place. The primary purpose of significant figures is to convey the inherent in measured or calculated values, ensuring that the reported precision matches the actual reliability of the and preventing the implication of greater accuracy than is justified. By limiting the number of digits to those that are significant, this convention promotes clear communication of measurement limitations in scientific and technical fields, where overprecise reporting could mislead interpretations. The concept of significant figures originated in the 19th century as scientists increasingly emphasized the need for precise reporting of measurements to reflect experimental reliability. Early discussions, such as those by Silas W. Holman in the late 1800s, laid the groundwork for modern rules by addressing how to handle digits in relation to instrumental precision.

Rules for Identifying Significant Figures

Significant figures are determined by applying a set of standard conventions to the digits in a numerical value, ensuring that only those digits reflecting the precision of a measurement are counted. These rules apply primarily to measured quantities, where the number of significant figures indicates the reliability of the measurement. The core rules for identifying significant figures are as follows:
  • All non-zero digits are significant. For example, the number 123 has three significant figures, as each digit contributes to the precision.
  • Zeros located between non-zero digits are significant. In 1002, for instance, the zero between 1 and 2 is significant, resulting in four significant figures total.
  • Leading zeros, which appear before the first non-zero digit, are not significant. Thus, 0.0025 has two significant figures, with the leading zeros serving only to position the decimal.
  • Trailing zeros in a number containing a decimal point are significant. The value 0.00250, for example, has three significant figures, where the trailing zero after the decimal indicates precision to that place.
For whole numbers without a decimal point, trailing zeros are generally not considered significant, leading to potential . The number 100, for instance, is typically interpreted as having one significant figure, though context may suggest otherwise. However, the presence of a decimal point explicitly makes trailing zeros significant; 100. thus has three significant figures. A special case arises with exact numbers, such as those from counting (e.g., 12 apples) or defined relationships (e.g., in a minute), which are considered to have an infinite number of significant figures since they represent precise, non-measured quantities. These do not limit the precision in calculations involving measurements.

Notation for Ambiguous Cases

In cases where the number of significant figures in a measurement is ambiguous, particularly with trailing zeros in integers lacking a decimal point, specific notation techniques are employed to clarify precision. For instance, trailing zeros without a decimal, such as in 100, may indicate one, two, or three significant figures depending on context, as these zeros could be placeholders rather than measured values. To resolve this, appending a decimal point to the number signals that the trailing zeros are significant; thus, 100. explicitly denotes three significant figures. Scientific notation is the most reliable method to eliminate ambiguity, as it explicitly shows all significant digits in the . For example, 1.00 × 10² clearly indicates three significant figures for the value 100, while 1 × 10² suggests only one. Similarly, for 1230 with three significant figures, it can be written as 1.23 × 10³. This approach is particularly useful for integers where trailing zeros might otherwise be interpreted as non-significant placeholders. Alternative notations, such as or underlines, are sometimes used in educational or technical contexts to mark specific digits. An over the last significant figure, followed by trailing zeros, indicates the zeros are not significant; for example, 500 with an over the 5 treats it as one significant figure. Conversely, underlining non-significant zeros, as in 5̲0̲0 for one significant figure, highlights those as placeholders. Placeholders like asterisks may appear in computational or tabular contexts to denote estimated or ambiguous digits, though this is less standardized. These methods primarily address ambiguities in whole numbers without decimals, where trailing zeros do not clearly convey precision. However, there is no universal standard across disciplines, leading to potential inconsistencies; remains the preferred and most precise option for unambiguous communication.

Rounding and Representation

Rounding to a Specified Number of Significant Figures

Rounding to a specified number of significant figures involves adjusting a numerical value to retain only the desired precision, ensuring that the reported result reflects the appropriate level of accuracy without introducing false . This requires first identifying the significant figures in the original number, as outlined in for identification, and then applying systematic to the target count. The goal is to round to the nearest value that maintains the correct number of significant digits, typically following the conventional "round half up" method for ties. The steps for rounding are straightforward: (1) Determine the position of the rightmost significant digit that will be retained based on the specified number of figures; this is often the least significant digit in the rounded result. (2) Examine the digit immediately following this position, known as the first non-significant digit. (3) Apply the rule based on that digit's value, and discard all subsequent digits. (4) If rounding up causes a carry-over, propagate it through the number as needed, which may alter preceding digits or even shift the place. This method ensures consistency and minimizes bias in representation. The primary rounding rules are as follows: If the first non-significant digit is less than 5, leave the least significant retained digit unchanged. If it is greater than 5, increase the least significant retained digit by 1. For the case where it is exactly 5 (with no non-zero digits following), the standard convention is to round up—incrementing the retained digit by 1—to the nearest value, though this can introduce a slight upward bias over many operations. In some scientific and computational standards, a variant known as bankers' rounding (or round half to even) is used instead, where the retained digit is rounded up only if it is odd, preserving the even digit otherwise; this approach aims to balance rounding errors statistically but is not the default in most general chemistry and physics contexts. Consider the number 12.346, which has five significant figures. To round to three significant figures, the rightmost retained digit is the 3 (in the tenths place), and the next digit is 4, which is less than 5, so it remains 12.3. For 9.995 rounded to three significant figures, retain the first three digits as 9.99 (up to the hundredths place), and the next digit is 5, which requires rounding up, resulting in 10.0 after carry-over propagates through the digits. These examples illustrate how preserves the leading significant figures while adjusting for precision.

Scientific Notation for Clarity

Scientific notation offers a standardized method for representing numbers to unambiguously indicate the number of significant figures, particularly when dealing with very large, very small, or numbers containing ambiguous zeros. The standard format is a×10ba \times 10^b, where the mantissa aa satisfies 1a<101 \leq |a| < 10, and all digits in aa are considered significant unless explicitly stated otherwise. This convention ensures that the precision of a measurement is clearly conveyed without reliance on the placement of zeros, which can be misleading in conventional form. One primary advantage of scientific notation is its ability to eliminate ambiguity from leading and trailing zeros. For example, the decimal number 0.00234 has leading zeros that do not contribute to significance, but expressing it as 2.34×1032.34 \times 10^{-3} explicitly shows three significant figures. Likewise, 12300 in decimal form is ambiguous regarding whether it has three, four, or five significant figures due to the trailing zeros, but 1.23×1041.23 \times 10^4 clarifies that only three digits are significant. This clarity is essential in scientific communication, as it prevents misinterpretation of precision. Another benefit is that scientific notation facilitates rounding to a desired number of significant figures by isolating the mantissa, where adjustments can be made directly before applying the exponent. To convert a number, shift the decimal point in the original value until the mantissa lies between 1 and 10, counting the shifts to determine the exponent bb (positive for shifts left, negative for shifts right), and ensure the mantissa reflects the appropriate significant digits through rounding if needed. For instance, starting from 12300 and aiming for three significant figures involves rounding to 123 and then shifting to 1.23×1041.23 \times 10^4. This process aligns with standard rounding practices to maintain consistency in precision.

Expressing Measurement Uncertainty

In measurements, is explicitly expressed using the notation y±uy \pm u, where yy is the measured value and uu is the associated , often the standard uncertainty or expanded uncertainty. This format conveys both the best estimate and the range within which the is likely to lie, with the uncertainty typically reported to one or two significant figures to reflect the precision of the measurement process. The Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (), published by the Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (JCGM), recommends this symmetric notation to avoid ambiguity, preferring it over alternatives like parentheses for the uncertainty digits unless space is limited. The rules for this notation ensure consistency between the value and its : the first nonzero digit of the must align with the last significant digit of the value, and the value itself is rounded to the same place as that digit in the . For instance, if the calculated is 0.035, it is rounded to 0.04 (one significant figure) or 0.035 (two significant figures if higher precision is justified), and the value is then rounded accordingly to match. This alignment prevents overstatement of precision and ensures the reported figures are meaningful. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) further specifies that uncertainties should include digits that impact at least the second significant figure of the combined to maintain reliability. Examples illustrate these conventions effectively. A measurement reported as 12.34±0.0512.34 \pm 0.05 indicates the value is precise to the hundredths place, with the uncertainty's single significant figure (5) aligning at that position; here, the total expression carries four significant figures in the value but emphasizes the uncertainty's role in limiting reliability. Similarly, 100±1100 \pm 1 conveys a value with three significant figures overall, where the uncertainty of 1 (one significant figure) aligns with the units place, suitable for quantities like or where trailing zeros might otherwise be ambiguous. In cases requiring expanded uncertainty for a specific level (e.g., 95%), the notation extends to y±Uy \pm U (with coverage factor kk), still following the same digit alignment rules. ISO standards, particularly through the GUM (ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008), establish that uncertainty is generally expressed with one significant figure for simplicity, resorting to two only when it better represents the distribution or when the leading digit is 1 (to avoid understating variability). This approach balances informativeness with practicality, ensuring reports are not cluttered by excessive digits while adhering to metrological best practices.

Arithmetic with Significant Figures

Multiplication and Division Rules

In multiplication and division operations involving measurements, the result must be expressed with the same number of significant figures as the measurement that has the fewest significant figures. This rule ensures that the precision of the final result does not exceed the precision of the least precise input value, thereby avoiding the implication of greater accuracy than is justified by the . The rationale for this approach stems from the nature of and division, which preserve relative precision rather than absolute precision. Significant figures represent the relative in a , and when values are multiplied or divided, the relative uncertainties propagate multiplicatively; thus, the overall relative precision is limited by the input with the smallest number of significant figures. Mathematically, this can be expressed as: sigfigs(result)=min(sigfigs(a),sigfigs(b))\text{sigfigs}(result) = \min(\text{sigfigs}(a), \text{sigfigs}(b)) for operations such as a×ba \times b or a/ba / b. To apply this rule, first determine the number of significant figures in each operand using standard identification guidelines, then perform the calculation and round the result accordingly. For example, consider 2.3×4.562.3 \times 4.56: the value 2.3 has two significant figures, while 4.56 has three, so the product (10.488) is rounded to two significant figures, yielding 10. Similarly, for 123/4.5123 / 4.5, 123 has three significant figures and 4.5 has two, so the quotient (27.333...) is rounded to two significant figures, resulting in 27. These examples illustrate how the rule maintains consistency in reporting precision across operations.

Addition and Subtraction Rules

In addition and subtraction operations involving , the result must reflect the precision of the least precise input value, determined by the position of the last significant digit relative to the point. This ensures that the outcome does not imply greater certainty than warranted by the measurements, as these operations propagate absolute additively. The precision is governed by the input with the largest absolute uncertainty in its place value, meaning the result is rounded to the same decimal place as the measurement with the fewest decimal places. To apply this rule, align the numbers by their decimal points to identify the rightmost position of certainty across all operands. Perform the , then round the result to that position, discarding any digits beyond it. This approach contrasts with and division, where relative precision (significant figure count) is prioritized over positional alignment. For example, consider the addition of 12.52 (two decimal places) and 3.2 (one decimal place):

12.52 + 3.2 ------ 15.72

12.52 + 3.2 ------ 15.72

The sum is rounded to one decimal place, yielding 15.7, as limited by the precision of 3.2. Similarly, for 100 (no decimal places) + 23.4 (one decimal place), the alignment shows:

100.0 + 23.4 ------ 123.4

100.0 + 23.4 ------ 123.4

Rounded to no decimal places, the result is 123, reflecting the uncertainty in the units place of 100. Another illustration involves multiple terms: adding 21.1 (one decimal place), 2.037 (three decimal places), and 6.13 (two decimal places) gives 29.267, but rounding to one decimal place produces 29.3. In cases with large numbers, such as 163,000,000 (precise to millions) + 217,985,000 (precise to thousands) + 96,432,768 (precise to units), intermediate rounding to one extra digit beyond the least precise (millions) yields a final sum of 477,000,000. These methods prevent overstatement of precision, particularly when subtracting close values, where cancellation can reduce effective significant figures.

Mixed Operations and Final Rounding

In calculations involving multiple types of arithmetic operations, such as a of or with or division, the must be followed while preserving precision in intermediate results. Specifically, computations proceed according to standard precedence rules—parentheses first, then exponents, followed by and division from left to right, and finally and from left to right—with extra significant digits retained during intermediate steps to prevent loss of accuracy. Only the final result is rounded to the appropriate number of significant figures, determined by the operation that imposes the strictest limitation on precision across the entire expression./02%3A_Measurement_and_Problem_Solving/2.04%3A_Significant_Figures_in_Calculations) For instance, evaluate the expression (2.3 + 4.56) × 1.2. The yields 6.86, which is kept unrounded; multiplying this by 1.2 gives 8.232. Since both 2.3 and 1.2 have two significant figures, limiting the overall precision, the final result rounds to 8.2. Premature of the sum to 6.9 (reflecting the decimal place limitation of ) would yield 8.28 after multiplication, rounding to 8.3 and introducing unnecessary error./02%3A_Measurement_and_Problem_Solving/2.04%3A_Significant_Figures_in_Calculations) This approach minimizes propagation of rounding errors, ensuring the final answer reflects the true uncertainty inherent in the input measurements rather than artificial truncation. An exception applies when an intermediate result must be reported independently or reused in a separate calculation, in which case it should be rounded according to the significant figure rules pertinent to that specific step.

Advanced Applications

Logarithms, Exponents, and Transcendental Functions

In calculations involving logarithms, the number of decimal places in the mantissa of the result matches the number of significant figures in the input value, while the characteristic (integer part) is considered exact. For example, the log10(2.34)\log_{10}(2.34) has three significant figures in the input, so the mantissa should have three places: log10(2.34)=0.369\log_{10}(2.34) = 0.369. This rule ensures that the relative precision of the original is preserved in the . More formally, for log10(x)\log_{10}(x), the mantissa is reported with a number of decimal places equal to the number of significant figures in xx: sigfigs(log10(x))=sigfigs(x)\text{sigfigs}(\log_{10}(x)) = \text{sigfigs}(x) where only the fractional part (mantissa) contributes to the significant figures count. Another example is log10(123.4)2.0912\log_{10}(123.4) \approx 2.0912, reported with four decimal places in the mantissa corresponding to the four significant figures in 123.4. For antilogarithms (inverse logarithms), the process reverses: the number of significant figures in the output matches the number of decimal places in the input mantissa. If the logarithm has nn decimal places, the antilog should have nn significant figures. For instance, the antilog of 0.369 (three decimal places) yields 2.34, with three significant figures. This maintains consistency in precision propagation from logarithmic to linear scales. In exponential operations, such as aba^b, the significant figures in the result depend on the relative precision of the base aa and the absolute precision of the exponent bb. The relative in the result is approximately the relative in aa multiplied by b|b|, so the number of significant figures is limited by the input with the least relative precision. For example, e1.2e^{1.2} with 1.2 having two significant figures results in approximately 3.3, also with two significant figures. This approach accounts for the amplification of through . For other transcendental functions, such as or cosine, the output typically inherits the number of significant figures from the input argument, reflecting the function's local behavior near the input value. Thus, if the input xx to sin(x)\sin(x) has three significant figures, sin(x)\sin(x) is reported with three significant figures, ensuring the result aligns with the precision of xx. This rule applies similarly to other non-algebraic functions like exponentials in series expansions, prioritizing the input's reliability over function-specific sensitivities unless indicates otherwise.

Estimation Techniques and Extra Digits

In techniques, significant figures are often reduced to one or two digits to perform quick, rough calculations, particularly in order-of-magnitude assessments or Fermi problems, where the goal is to obtain a figure rather than precise values. This approach emphasizes conceptual understanding and scalability, allowing scientists and engineers to evaluate feasibility without detailed data. For instance, when estimating the with a of 10 m, approximating π as 3.1 (two significant figures) yields an area of approximately 3.1 × 10² = 3.1 × 10² m², providing a reasonable estimate for preliminary planning. To minimize cumulative rounding errors in multi-step calculations, it is standard practice to retain one or two extra significant figures in intermediate results, only the final answer to the appropriate number of significant figures based on the input data. This technique preserves precision during chained operations, such as and division, where early could propagate inaccuracies. For example, in calculating the specific gravity of a with dimensions 11.1 cm, 11.2 cm, and 11.3 cm (each with three significant figures) and 3131 g (four significant figures), the is first computed as 11.1 × 11.2 × 11.3 = 1404.8 cm³, retained with four figures as 1405 cm³; the then becomes 3131 / 1405 ≈ 2.2285 g/cm³, kept as 2.229 g/cm³; and dividing by (0.9974 g/cm³, four figures) gives 2.2348, which rounds to 2.23 for the final specific gravity (three significant figures matching the limiting inputs). The benefits of these practices include enhanced accuracy in the final result without overstating the precision of the original measurements, as the extra digits act as a buffer against round-off while adhering to the rules of final rounding in mixed operations. This method is widely adopted in scientific computations to balance computational efficiency with reliable outcomes.

Significant Figures in Statistics and Computing

In statistical , the reporting of and standard deviations adheres to significant figure conventions that reflect the underlying precision. When a from measurements each possessing a certain number of significant figures, the is typically reported with the same number of significant figures as the input , ensuring consistency with the precision of the original observations. For instance, if points are given to three significant figures, the average should also be expressed to three figures. The standard deviation, which quantifies variability, is generally rounded to one or two significant figures, and this determines the decimal place for the to avoid implying unwarranted precision. In computational contexts, significant figures are constrained by the finite precision of floating-point representations, as defined by standards like IEEE 754. The double-precision format provides approximately 15 decimal significant digits, corresponding to its 53-bit mantissa, which limits the accuracy of numerical operations and requires awareness of potential errors in algorithms. To mitigate accumulation of such errors during summations or iterative processes, guard digits—extra bits beyond the standard precision—are employed in units, preserving additional information during intermediate calculations before final . This practice enhances the reliability of results in extended computations without exceeding the machine's inherent limits. Practical examples illustrate these principles in simulation-based methods. In Monte Carlo simulations, outputs such as estimated means or integrals are rounded to match the significant figures of input parameters, preventing the illusion of higher precision from numerous iterations; instead, the Monte Carlo guides the appropriate digit count, often limiting trust to the first two or three significant figures depending on sample size. Over-precision in such outputs is avoided by aligning reporting with both input fidelity and simulation variability. A key challenge arises from the binary nature of floating-point storage, where decimal numbers like 0.1 cannot be represented exactly, potentially shifting the effective significant figures in outputs and necessitating careful validation against decimal-based expectations.

Measurement and Precision

Relationship to Accuracy and Precision

Significant figures serve as a tool to convey the precision of a , which refers to the degree of or consistency among repeated measurements of the same under identical conditions. In contrast, describes how closely a measured value approaches the true or accepted value, often affected by systematic errors rather than the number of significant figures reported. While a greater number of significant figures implies higher precision—indicating finer resolution in the process—it does not guarantee accuracy, as biases in or methodology can lead to consistently wrong results despite tight . For instance, consider a where multiple measurements of a yield values of 9.80 m, 9.80 m, and 9.79 m, reported to three significant figures as 9.80 m; this demonstrates high precision due to low variability (standard deviation ≈ 0.01 m), but if the true length is 10.00 m, the result is inaccurate owing to a systematic , such as a offset in the measuring device. Conversely, measurements scattered around 10.00 m (e.g., 9.95 m, 10.05 m, 9.90 m) might be accurate on but lack precision, and expressing them with fewer significant figures, such as 10.0 m, appropriately reflects the without overstating reliability. This distinction underscores that significant figures quantify the estimated in the last digit, typically ±1 in that position, thereby linking directly to precision but requiring separate validation for accuracy through to known standards. In scientific reporting, significant figures can be complemented by in graphical representations to visually distinguish precision from accuracy; for example, a data point at 9.80 m with error bars spanning ±0.05 m illustrates the precision (narrow bars) while the offset from the highlights inaccuracy. Such notations emphasize that while significant figures provide a concise way to express reliability, achieving both high precision and accuracy demands careful control of experimental variables and error sources beyond mere digit counting.

Standards in Scientific Reporting

In scientific reporting, established standards from organizations such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC), and the provide guidelines for using significant figures to convey measurement precision. NIST recommends expressing numerical values with a number of significant digits that reflects the , typically limiting uncertainties to one or two significant figures to avoid implying unwarranted precision. Similarly, the IUPAC Green Book advises matching the decimal places of the measured value to those of the uncertainty, using notations like value ± uncertainty or value(uncertainty) for the last digits, ensuring the reported figures align with the standard uncertainty (1σ). The ISO/IEC Guide 98-3 (GUM) and ISO 80000 series further emphasize reporting uncertainties to one or two significant digits, with the value rounded to match the uncertainty's place value for consistency in quantities and units. Conventions in scientific publications prioritize clarity by employing for very large or small numbers to preserve significant figures without leading or trailing zeros that could mislead on precision. For instance, a value like 0.0001234 is reported as 1.234 × 10^{-4} to indicate four significant figures. Standards also discourage arbitrary figures by requiring that reported digits not exceed the precision justified by the process, such as avoiding extra decimals in values unless supported by . In cases of expanded uncertainties (typically at 95% confidence with coverage factor k=2), NIST guidelines specify to two significant digits and aligning the result accordingly. Post-2000 updates to these standards, including the 2008 edition of and the ISO 80000 series (initiated around ), have shifted emphasis from implied precision via significant figures alone to explicit reporting of , enhancing reproducibility and reducing ambiguity in . The 2012 IUPAC Green Book and 2019 NIST GLP 9 further reinforce this by promoting uncertainty budgets and standardized rules, moving away from solely digit-counting methods toward integrated precision assessment. Journal-specific styles illustrate these standards in practice; for example, the (APA) guidelines recommend means and standard deviations to one decimal place, test statistics (e.g., t, F) to two decimal places, while exact p-values are reported to two or three decimal places unless less than .001. This aligns with broader conventions by limiting figures to those that meaningfully represent variability, as seen in reporting correlations or effect sizes without spurious precision.

Common Pitfalls and Exceptions

One common pitfall in applying significant figures arises from confusing exact numbers, which have infinite significant figures due to their or nature, with measured numbers that carry inherent . For instance, dividing an exact count like 100 items by another exact count of 100 yields exactly 1, with no limitation on significant figures; however, if both are measured values such as 100.0 and 100.0, the result is 1.00, limited to three significant figures by the measurements' precision. Failure to distinguish these can lead to over- or under-reporting precision in calculations involving conversions or ratios. Another frequent error is premature rounding during multi-step calculations, which can accumulate inaccuracies and distort the final result. Instead, extra digits should be retained through intermediate steps and applied only at the end to match the precision of the least accurate input. For example, in evaluating (5.00 / 1.235) + 3.000 + (6.35 / 4.0), intermediate values should keep full precision before summing to 8.6. In and , overlooking the position of the least precise place often results in incorrect ; the result must align with the input having the fewest places, such as 100 + 23.643 yielding 124 rather than 123.643. Exceptions to standard rules occur in multiplication and division when inputs have very disparate precisions, where considering relative —rather than solely the minimum significant figures—provides a more accurate assessment of the result's . The relative in such operations is the square root of the sum of the squares of the individual relative uncertainties, allowing retention of more figures from the more precise input if the less precise one dominates the overall . Percentages often deviate from strict significant figure counts, typically reported to two significant figures for practicality in scientific and statistical contexts, such as expressing 24.567% as 25% to reflect reasonable precision without implying undue accuracy. Contextual considerations also introduce exceptions; for example, in financial reporting like , values are conventionally expressed to two decimal places regardless of measurement precision, prioritizing standardized formatting over variable significant figures. Always evaluate the operational context—such as exact conversions in science versus fixed decimals in applied fields—to apply rules appropriately and avoid misleading precision.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.