Cargando…
Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process
Process Capability Indices (PCIs) are very helpful to measure the manufacturing capability and production quality of the products in many manufacturing processes. These PCIs are calculated by using a relationship between process mean and standard deviation, provided that process follows a normal dis...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10562476/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37813919 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44267-4 |
_version_ | 1785118137599918080 |
---|---|
author | Kashif, Muhammad Ullah, Sami Aslam, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Zafer |
author_facet | Kashif, Muhammad Ullah, Sami Aslam, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Zafer |
author_sort | Kashif, Muhammad |
collection | PubMed |
description | Process Capability Indices (PCIs) are very helpful to measure the manufacturing capability and production quality of the products in many manufacturing processes. These PCIs are calculated by using a relationship between process mean and standard deviation, provided that process follows a normal distribution. In case of non-normal processes many researchers recommended the use of robust PCIs by modifying the classical PCIs. In case of robust PCIs most of the work is reported on first- and second-generation PCIs but less work is reported on third generation PCIs. The objective of this work was to evaluate the efficiency of three dispersion measures, namely median absolute deviation (MAD), interquartile range (IQR), and Gini's mean difference (GMD), as a measure of dispersion in third generation PCIs and construct their bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs). The efficacy of these measures is compared with quantile-based PCIs under different asymmetric behaviour of the Weibull process. The results showed that quantile-based PCIs are strongly influenced by high asymmetry and IQR method provides a poor estimator across all sample sizes. On the other hand, the GMD method performed well under low, moderate, and high asymmetry of the Weibull process, but its irregular behavior needs to be addressed carefully. Among all selected four methods MAD-method performed better under low and moderate asymmetric conditions. In case of interval estimation, bias-corrected percentile (BCPB) CIs was recommended for quantile-based PCIs, while percentile (PB) and percentile-t (PTB) CIs were recommended for MAD-based PCIs under all asymmetric conditions. To validate the simulated findings, two real-world datasets were analyzed that supported the simulation results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10562476 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105624762023-10-11 Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process Kashif, Muhammad Ullah, Sami Aslam, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Zafer Sci Rep Article Process Capability Indices (PCIs) are very helpful to measure the manufacturing capability and production quality of the products in many manufacturing processes. These PCIs are calculated by using a relationship between process mean and standard deviation, provided that process follows a normal distribution. In case of non-normal processes many researchers recommended the use of robust PCIs by modifying the classical PCIs. In case of robust PCIs most of the work is reported on first- and second-generation PCIs but less work is reported on third generation PCIs. The objective of this work was to evaluate the efficiency of three dispersion measures, namely median absolute deviation (MAD), interquartile range (IQR), and Gini's mean difference (GMD), as a measure of dispersion in third generation PCIs and construct their bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs). The efficacy of these measures is compared with quantile-based PCIs under different asymmetric behaviour of the Weibull process. The results showed that quantile-based PCIs are strongly influenced by high asymmetry and IQR method provides a poor estimator across all sample sizes. On the other hand, the GMD method performed well under low, moderate, and high asymmetry of the Weibull process, but its irregular behavior needs to be addressed carefully. Among all selected four methods MAD-method performed better under low and moderate asymmetric conditions. In case of interval estimation, bias-corrected percentile (BCPB) CIs was recommended for quantile-based PCIs, while percentile (PB) and percentile-t (PTB) CIs were recommended for MAD-based PCIs under all asymmetric conditions. To validate the simulated findings, two real-world datasets were analyzed that supported the simulation results. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10562476/ /pubmed/37813919 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44267-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Kashif, Muhammad Ullah, Sami Aslam, Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Zafer Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process |
title | Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process |
title_full | Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process |
title_fullStr | Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process |
title_full_unstemmed | Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process |
title_short | Robust process capability indices C(pm) and C(pmk) using Weibull process |
title_sort | robust process capability indices c(pm) and c(pmk) using weibull process |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10562476/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37813919 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44267-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kashifmuhammad robustprocesscapabilityindicescpmandcpmkusingweibullprocess AT ullahsami robustprocesscapabilityindicescpmandcpmkusingweibullprocess AT aslammuhammad robustprocesscapabilityindicescpmandcpmkusingweibullprocess AT iqbalmuhammadzafer robustprocesscapabilityindicescpmandcpmkusingweibullprocess |