传统缺点的评估与新的顺序选择

Economic Quality Control Pub Date : 2013-12-01 DOI:10.1515/eqc-2013-0014

J. Chimka, Qilu Wang

{"title":"传统缺点的评估与新的顺序选择","authors":"J. Chimka, Qilu Wang","doi":"10.1515/eqc-2013-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Demerits control is the traditional tool for monitoring defects of different severity with a single chart. It requires arbitrary assignment of numerical values to the ordinal scale and therefore is theoretically flawed. We assess the error rates of demerits control compared to an alternative based on the proportional odds model only to find that it is not more powerful than traditional demerits.","PeriodicalId":360039,"journal":{"name":"Economic Quality Control","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Traditional Demerits and a New Ordinal Alternative\",\"authors\":\"J. Chimka, Qilu Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/eqc-2013-0014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Demerits control is the traditional tool for monitoring defects of different severity with a single chart. It requires arbitrary assignment of numerical values to the ordinal scale and therefore is theoretically flawed. We assess the error rates of demerits control compared to an alternative based on the proportional odds model only to find that it is not more powerful than traditional demerits.\",\"PeriodicalId\":360039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic Quality Control\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic Quality Control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/eqc-2013-0014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic Quality Control","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eqc-2013-0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

缺点控制是一种传统的用单个图表对不同严重程度的缺陷进行监控的工具。它要求将数值任意分配到有序尺度上，因此在理论上是有缺陷的。我们评估了基于比例赔率模型的过失控制与替代方案的错误率，结果发现它并不比传统的过失控制更强大。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Assessment of Traditional Demerits and a New Ordinal Alternative

Abstract Demerits control is the traditional tool for monitoring defects of different severity with a single chart. It requires arbitrary assignment of numerical values to the ordinal scale and therefore is theoretically flawed. We assess the error rates of demerits control compared to an alternative based on the proportional odds model only to find that it is not more powerful than traditional demerits.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Economic Quality Control

自引率

0.00%

发文量