A more thorough explanation:

The Daubert test is a method used by federal district courts to determine whether expert testimony is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702. This rule requires that expert testimony consist of scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge that will assist the fact-finder in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue.

The trial court acts as a "gatekeeper" of the evidence and must decide whether the proposed expert testimony meets the requirements of relevance and reliability. The court applies the test outside the jury's presence, usually during a pretrial Daubert hearing. At the hearing, the proponent must show that the expert's underlying reasoning or methodology and its application to the facts are scientifically valid.

In ruling on admissibility, the court considers a flexible list of factors, including:

• Whether the theory can be or has been tested
• Whether the theory has been subjected to peer review or publication
• The theory's known or potential rate of error and whether there are standards that control its operation
• The degree to which the relevant scientific community has accepted the theory

For example, in the case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., the court applied the Daubert test to determine the admissibility of expert testimony regarding the link between a drug and birth defects. The court found that the expert's methodology was not scientifically valid and therefore excluded the testimony.

Another example is the case of Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, in which the court applied the Daubert test to determine the admissibility of expert testimony regarding a tire blowout. The court found that the expert's methodology was not reliable and therefore excluded the testimony.