A new distribution-free generally weighted moving average monitoring scheme for detecting unknown shifts in the process location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distribution-free (or nonparametric) monitoring schemes are needed in industrial, chemical and biochemical processes or any other analytical non-industrial process when the assumption of normality fails to hold. The Mann-Whitney (MW) test is one of the most powerful tests used in the design of these types of monitoring schemes. This test is equivalent to the Wilcoxon rank-sum (WRS) test. In this paper, we propose a new distribution-free generally weighted moving average (GWMA) monitoring scheme based on the WRS statistic. The performance of the proposed scheme is investigated using the average run-length, the standard deviation of the run-length, percentile of the run-length and some characteristics of the quality loss function through extensive simulation. The proposed scheme is compared with the existing parametric and nonparametric GWMA monitoring schemes and other well-known control schemes. The effect of the estimated design parameters as well as the effect of the Phase I sample size on the Phase II performance of the new monitoring scheme are also investigated. The results show that the proposed scheme presents better and attractive mean shifts detection properties, and therefore outperforms the existing monitoring schemes in many situations. Moreover, it requires a reasonable number of Phase I observations to guarantee stability and accuracy in the Phase II performance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".