We did not find any obvious relationship between our measured coronal loop magnetic field strengths and the magnitude of the photospheric magnetic flux of the active regions in this survey . We performed some preliminary checks , however , to investigate whether we could uncover any obvious correlations with other properties of the loops . Excluding the loop segment where the measured field strength was too high for the weak field approximation to be valid , we found a strong correlation ( r=0.66 ) with the measured temperature , such that higher magnetic field strengths lead to higher loop     were made around the loop , although our sample does cover quite a wide range of loop properties from cooler , denser cases to hotter , more tenuous ones . We also found that a relationship can be established with the loop pressure that extends to the loop segment with the highest field strength ( shown in Figure 4 ) . This segment also has the highest density and lowest temperature , which act to offset each other and allow the loop to follow the same trend as the others and the correlation between the parameters is also strong ( r=0.68 ) . Our initial survey has been limited by the need to select a sample from data taken early in the mission when calibration degradation was minimal . Ongoing progress in improving the EIS calibration will allow a wider study to take advantage of more extensive data ( including flare data ) in the future . This should help to clarify these relationships further . Landi et al . ( 2020 ) estimate the uncertainty in their measurements to be on the order of 70 % -driven by multiple factors such as the cross - calibration between the short - and longwavelength detectors , the density diagnostic ratio , atomic physics parameters , and also the accuracy of the energy separation between the 4 D 5/2 and 4 D 7/2 levels . This includes an estimate of the contribution from the radiometric calibration and sensitivity degradation over time . As discussed , we chose observations from early in the mission to minimize the impact of the time - dependence of the calibration . Based on the Warren et al . ( 2014 ) model , sensitivity loss is minimal ( < 10 % ) for the datasets we use , so this contribution is reduced from 50 % to 24 % . This propagates through to produce an uncertainty in I M IT /I M 2 of 51 % . We adopt this value in Table 1 . Furthermore , the conversion from I M IT /I M 2 to B is not linear ( see Figure 2 ) . To assess the impact of the uncertainties on this conversion , for each loop , we performed a 10000 run Monte - Carlo simulation where we randomly perturbed the I M IT /I M 2 value within a uniform distribution covering the range defined by the 51 % uncertainty . We then take the standard deviation of the magnetic field strength distribution , with the estimated ∼20 % uncertainty in the 4 D 5/2 and 4 D 7/2 energy separation added in quadrature , as our evaluation of the uncertainty in B. These range from 20 - 36 % and are added in Table 1 .