Using what type of measurements can validate the accuracy of laboratory analyses and detectors?

The correct answer falls under the category of spiked measurements. This methodology involves adding a known quantity of analyte, in this case radon, to a sample that is then analyzed alongside standard samples. By doing this, one can determine how accurately laboratory analyses and detectors measure the radon concentration, as it allows for a direct comparison between the known quantity and the detected quantity. This is vital for validating the performance of analytical techniques and ensuring the reliability of radon measurements in various environments.

In laboratory settings, spiked samples can help identify any issues with detection methods, such as biases or performance deviations that might not be apparent when using traditional calibration methods alone. This approach helps to enhance the confidence in the measurement results obtained from radon detectors and laboratory analyses, which is critical for making informed decisions based on those measurements.

Other types of measurements like control, standard, or random serve different purposes in analytical practices but do not directly assess the accuracy of laboratory analyses in the same targeted manner as spiked measurements do. Control samples ensure consistency in the testing process, standard samples provide reference values for calibration but cannot test for accuracy in the same way, and random samples are used for statistical evaluations rather than specific accuracy checks.