A Generally Weighted Moving Average Signed‐rank Control Chart
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
The idea of process monitoring emerged so as to preserve and improve the quality of a manufacturing process. In this regard, control charts are widely accepted tools in the manufacturing sector for monitoring the quality of a process. However, a specific distributional assumption for any process is restrictive and often criticised. Distribution‐free control charts are efficient alternatives when information on the process distribution is partially or completely unavailable. In this article, we propose a distribution‐free generally weighted moving average (GWMA) control chart based on the Wilcoxon signed‐rank statistic. Extensive simulation is performed to study the performance of the proposed chart. The performance of the proposed chart is then compared with a number of existing control charts including the parametric GWMA chart for subgroup averages, a recently proposed GWMA chart based on the sign statistic and an exponentially weighted moving average chart based on the signed‐rank statistic. The simulation results reveal that the proposed chart performs just as well as and in many cases better than the existing charts and therefore can serve as a useful alternative in practice. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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