本powerpoint演示首先提供美国水资源和美国水资源中心实验室的背景信息。它提出了IC（实验室）与ISE或ISE之间相关性差的问题 色度（字段）在哪里 现场氟化物结果始终高于实验室结果 对于相同的采样位置，以及 很难验证剂量。造成差异的可能原因可能是 方法不同，和/或方法性能的变化。目的是减少形式和背景效果。该方法涉及模拟: 补偿方法上的差异 实验室的IC分析； 评估样品分析物剖面； 确定趋势； 创建“基质效应”（ME）添加解决方案；和 融入我的分析程序。结论和益处如下: 方法论偏差得到确认； 矩阵调整提供了更精确的结果 与ISE和净“零”比色法相比； 能够更自信地验证现场剂量； 提高顾客满意度；和 对其他分析物的边际影响。包括数字。

This powerpoint presentation begins by providing background information on American Water and the American Water Central Laboratory. It presents a problem of poor correlation between IC (Lab) vs ISE or Colorimetric (Field) where field fluoride results consistently higher than Lab results for same sample locations, and difficult to validate dosing. Possible causes for the differences may be the methodology is not the same, and/or variations in method performance. The goal was to reduce form and background effects. The approach - simulation involved: compensate for method differences in laboratory's IC analysis; assess sample analyte profile; identify trends; create "Matrix Effects" (ME) additive solution; and, integrate ME into analytical procedures. Conclusions and benefits were: methodology biases confirmed; matrix adjustment provides more accurate results compared to ISE and net "zero" for Colorimetric; able to verify field dosing with greater confidence; improved customer satisfaction; and, marginal effect on other analytes. Includes figures.