{"title":"歪斜分布的控制图","authors":"D. Karagöz, C. Hamurkaroğlu","doi":"10.51936/ghaa8860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper the control limits of \\(\\bar{X}\\) and \\(R\\) control charts for skewed distributions are obtained by considering the classic, the weighted variance (\\(\\mathit{WV}\\)), the weighted standard deviations (\\(\\mathit{WSD}\\)) and the skewness correction (\\(\\mathit{SC}\\)) methods. These methods are compared by using Monte Carlo simulation. Type I risk probabilities of these control charts are compared with respect to different subgroup sizes for skewed distributions which are Weibull, gamma and lognormal. Simulation results show that Type I risk of \\(\\mathit{SC}\\) method is less than that of other methods. When the distribution is approximately symmetric, then the Type I risks of Shewhart, \\(\\mathit{WV}\\) , \\(\\mathit{WSD}\\), and \\(\\mathit{SC}\\) \\(\\bar{X}\\) charts are comparable, while the \\(\\mathit{SC}\\) \\(R\\) chart has a noticeable smaller Type I risk.","PeriodicalId":242585,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Methodology and Statistics","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Control charts for skewed distributions\",\"authors\":\"D. Karagöz, C. Hamurkaroğlu\",\"doi\":\"10.51936/ghaa8860\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper the control limits of \\\\(\\\\bar{X}\\\\) and \\\\(R\\\\) control charts for skewed distributions are obtained by considering the classic, the weighted variance (\\\\(\\\\mathit{WV}\\\\)), the weighted standard deviations (\\\\(\\\\mathit{WSD}\\\\)) and the skewness correction (\\\\(\\\\mathit{SC}\\\\)) methods. These methods are compared by using Monte Carlo simulation. Type I risk probabilities of these control charts are compared with respect to different subgroup sizes for skewed distributions which are Weibull, gamma and lognormal. Simulation results show that Type I risk of \\\\(\\\\mathit{SC}\\\\) method is less than that of other methods. When the distribution is approximately symmetric, then the Type I risks of Shewhart, \\\\(\\\\mathit{WV}\\\\) , \\\\(\\\\mathit{WSD}\\\\), and \\\\(\\\\mathit{SC}\\\\) \\\\(\\\\bar{X}\\\\) charts are comparable, while the \\\\(\\\\mathit{SC}\\\\) \\\\(R\\\\) chart has a noticeable smaller Type I risk.\",\"PeriodicalId\":242585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Methodology and Statistics\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Methodology and Statistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51936/ghaa8860\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Methodology and Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51936/ghaa8860","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
In this paper the control limits of \(\bar{X}\) and \(R\) control charts for skewed distributions are obtained by considering the classic, the weighted variance (\(\mathit{WV}\)), the weighted standard deviations (\(\mathit{WSD}\)) and the skewness correction (\(\mathit{SC}\)) methods. These methods are compared by using Monte Carlo simulation. Type I risk probabilities of these control charts are compared with respect to different subgroup sizes for skewed distributions which are Weibull, gamma and lognormal. Simulation results show that Type I risk of \(\mathit{SC}\) method is less than that of other methods. When the distribution is approximately symmetric, then the Type I risks of Shewhart, \(\mathit{WV}\) , \(\mathit{WSD}\), and \(\mathit{SC}\) \(\bar{X}\) charts are comparable, while the \(\mathit{SC}\) \(R\) chart has a noticeable smaller Type I risk.