Correlation-Type Goodness of Fit Test for Extreme Value Distribution Based on Simultaneous Closeness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In reliability studies, one typically would assume a lifetime distribution for the units under study and then carry out the required analysis. One popular choice for the lifetime distribution is the family of two-parameter Weibull distributions (with scale and shape parameters) which, through a logarithmic transformation, can be transformed to the family of two-parameter extreme value distributions (with location and scale parameters). In carrying out a parametric analysis of this type, it is highly desirable to be able to test the validity of such a model assumption. A basic tool that is useful for this purpose is a quantile–quantile (QQ) plot, but in its use, the issue of the choice of plotting position arises. Here, by adopting the optimal plotting points based on Pitman closeness criterion proposed recently by Balakrishnan et al. (2010b Balakrishnan , N. , Davies , K. F. , Keating , J. P. , Mason , R. L. ( 2010b ). Computation of optimal plotting points based on Pitman Closeness with an application to goodness of fit for location-scale families. Submitted to Computational Statistics & Data Analysis. [Google Scholar]), and referred to as simultaneous closeness probability (SCP) plotting points, we propose a correlation-type goodness of fit test for the extreme value distribution. We compute the SCP plotting points for various sample sizes and use them to determine the mean, standard deviation and critical values for the proposed correlation-type test statistic. Using these critical values, we carry out a power study, similar to the one carried out by Kinnison (1989 Kinnison , R. ( 1989 ). Correlation coefficient goodness of fit test for extreme value distribution . The American Statistician 43 : 98 – 100 .[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), through which we demonstrate that the use of SCP plotting points results in better power than with the use of mean ranks as plotting points and nearly the same power as with the use of median ranks. We then demonstrate the use of the SCP plotting points and the associated correlation-type test for Weibull analysis with an illustrative example. Finally, for the sake of comparison, we also adapt two statistics proposed by Gan and Koehler (1990 Gan , F. F. , Koehler , K. J. ( 1990 ). Goodness of fit based on P-P probability plots . Technometrics 32 : 289 – 303 .[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), in the context of probability–probability (PP) plots, based on SCP plotting points and compare their performance to those based on mean ranks. The empirical study also reveals that the tests from the QQ plot have better power than those from the PP plot.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.195 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".