MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233914278 · doi:10.1080/07408170008967470

Gamma distribution parameter estimation for field reliability data with missing failure times

2000· article· en· W4233914278 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIIE Transactions · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Air ForceSimon Fraser University
KeywordsMissing dataCensoring (clinical trials)EstimatorReliability (semiconductor)Maximum likelihoodComputer scienceGamma distributionData miningField (mathematics)Data collectionReliability engineeringStatisticsMathematicsEngineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Maximum likelihood estimators have been developed for the gamma distribution when there is missing time-to-failure information. Data sets with missing time-to-failure data can arise from field data collection systems that rely on recorded observations of the system by the operators and maintenance personnel. In many regards, this type of data is highly desirable because it implicitly accounts for all actual usage and environmental stresses. Unfortunately the component times-to-failure are not always recorded for fielded systems because of a lack of elapsed time meters, unsatisfactory data reporting requirements, or incomplete or lost information. When only data of this type is available, it creates a non-standard form of da'ta censoring and it has generally not been possible to fit most common time-to-failure distributions. Reliability practitioners have sometimes made unsubstantiated simplifying assumptions so the data can be used. In this paper, a more rigorous approach is presented. Maximum likelihood estimators are derived and demonstrated for the gamma distribution based on merged data records where the individual failure times have not been recorded. These results are important because the gamma distribution can model diverse time-to-failure behavior. This provides a particularly useful tool for data sets that may otherwise not be satisfactorily analyzed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it