Parametric inference for component distributions from lifetimes of systems with dependent components
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In system reliability analysis, for an n ‐component system, the estimation of the performance of the components in the system is not straightforward in practice, especially when the components are dependent. Here, by assuming the n components in the system to be identically distributed with a common distribution belonging to a scale‐family and the dependence structure between the components being known, we discuss the estimation of the lifetime distributions of the components in the system based on the lifetimes of systems with the same structure. We develop a general framework for inference on the scale parameter of the component lifetime distribution. Specifically, the method of moments estimator (MME) and the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) are derived for the scale parameter, and the conditions for the existence of the MLE are also discussed. The asymptotic confidence intervals for the scale parameter are also developed based on the MME and the MLE. General simulation procedures for the system lifetime under this model are described. Finally, some examples of two‐ and three‐component systems are presented to illustrate all the inferential procedures developed here. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics, 2012
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it