Interval Estimation of the Stress-Strength Reliability with Independent Normal Random Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article develops a procedure to obtain highly accurate confidence interval estimates for the stress-strength reliability R = P(X > Y) where X and Y are data from independent normal distributions of unknown means and variances. Our method is based on third-order likelihood analysis and is compared to the conventional first-order likelihood ratio procedure as well as the approximate methods of Reiser and Guttman (1986 Reiser, B., Guttman, I. (1986). Statistical inference for Pr(Y < X): the normal case. Technometrics 28: 253257.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) and Guo and Krishnamoorthy (2004 Guo, H., Krishnamoorthy, K. (2004). New approximate inferential methods for the reliability parameter in a stress-strength model: the normal case. Commun. Statist. Theor. Meth. 33: 17151731.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). The use of our proposed method is illustrated by an empirical example and its superior accuracy in terms of coverage probability and error rate are examined through Monte Carlo simulation studies.
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 | 0.019 | 0.138 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".