SPC一点也不正常!

H. Neave
{"title":"SPC一点也不正常!","authors":"H. Neave","doi":"10.1108/09684879710173352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Knocks the final few nails into the coffin which contains the remains of the notion that the theory and practice of control charting depend on assumptions of normality. The subject’s creator, Dr Walter Shewhart, denied this as long ago as 1939! His most famous student, Dr W. Edwards Deming, denied it repeatedly thereafter. There appear to be two most crucial arguments as to why the “orthodox” statistician claims that normality is necessary. One is to enable probability interpretations of control limits. The other is to justify the conversion factors which are in common use in control‐chart calculations. The truth is that, even under normality, the usual probability interpretations are meaningless in practice and that, in the latter case, the behaviour of the conventional conversion factors is not at all dependent on normality but is in fact very similar over a wide range of differently‐shaped probability distributions.","PeriodicalId":155790,"journal":{"name":"Training for Quality","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"There’s nothing normal about SPC!\",\"authors\":\"H. Neave\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/09684879710173352\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Knocks the final few nails into the coffin which contains the remains of the notion that the theory and practice of control charting depend on assumptions of normality. The subject’s creator, Dr Walter Shewhart, denied this as long ago as 1939! His most famous student, Dr W. Edwards Deming, denied it repeatedly thereafter. There appear to be two most crucial arguments as to why the “orthodox” statistician claims that normality is necessary. One is to enable probability interpretations of control limits. The other is to justify the conversion factors which are in common use in control‐chart calculations. The truth is that, even under normality, the usual probability interpretations are meaningless in practice and that, in the latter case, the behaviour of the conventional conversion factors is not at all dependent on normality but is in fact very similar over a wide range of differently‐shaped probability distributions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":155790,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Training for Quality\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Training for Quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/09684879710173352\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Training for Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/09684879710173352","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

将最后几颗钉子敲进棺材,棺材中包含了控制图表的理论和实践依赖于常态假设的概念的残余。该主题的创造者沃尔特·休哈特博士早在1939年就否认了这一点!他最著名的学生w·爱德华兹·戴明博士此后多次否认。关于为什么“正统”统计学家声称常态是必要的,似乎有两个最关键的论点。一是使控制极限的概率解释成为可能。另一个是证明在控制图计算中常用的转换因子。事实是,即使在正态性下,通常的概率解释在实践中也没有意义,在后一种情况下,传统转换因子的行为完全不依赖于正态性,而实际上在各种不同形状的概率分布中非常相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
There’s nothing normal about SPC!
Knocks the final few nails into the coffin which contains the remains of the notion that the theory and practice of control charting depend on assumptions of normality. The subject’s creator, Dr Walter Shewhart, denied this as long ago as 1939! His most famous student, Dr W. Edwards Deming, denied it repeatedly thereafter. There appear to be two most crucial arguments as to why the “orthodox” statistician claims that normality is necessary. One is to enable probability interpretations of control limits. The other is to justify the conversion factors which are in common use in control‐chart calculations. The truth is that, even under normality, the usual probability interpretations are meaningless in practice and that, in the latter case, the behaviour of the conventional conversion factors is not at all dependent on normality but is in fact very similar over a wide range of differently‐shaped probability distributions.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信