MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323048088 · doi:10.18280/mmep.100111

Analysis Simple Step Stress Model under Competing Extension Weibull Failure Distribution Based on Progressive Type-II Censoring

2023· article· en· W4323048088 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdallah M. Abdelfattah, El-Sayed A. El-Sherpieny, Osama F. Khalil

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)Weibull distributionExtension (predicate logic)Simple (philosophy)Reliability engineeringComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsEconometricsEngineeringPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accelerated life testing (ALT), a procedure utilized in reliability analysis, allows testing units to be subject to increasingly elevated grades of stress during an experiment.Stepstress tests are a subclass of accelerated tests in which the stress levels rise consecutively at prearranged cycles, consequently, the researcher might find out results more swiftly than in ordinary working settings about the parameter of the lifetime distribution.Moreover, there are frequently multiple fatal causes for a test element's failure, for instance, technical or electric.These causes are recognized as "competing risks".The purpose of the analysis is to assess simple step stress accelerated life testing (SS-ALT) with competing Risks originating from the extension of Weibull distribution by applying a progressive Type-II censoring scheme.In this case, under the assumption of a cumulative exposure model, the authors successfully obtained the Bayes estimates (BEs) and maximum likelihood estimators (MLEs) of the undetermined average parameters of the various causes.For Bayesian computations, the squared error loss functions are considered.Additionally, the estimators' asymptotic variance-covariance matrix was created.Additionally, credible intervals and asymptotic confidence intervals (CIs) are provided.For a large sample size, the CIs of the unidentified parameters are developed.A numerical study is also involved to exhibit the accuracy and variability of various estimators for several sample sizes.An example is being used to exemplify the inference method that's also considered here.This study concludes that the mean lengths of credible intervals and asymptotic confidence intervals get shorter as the number of failures rises.The credible interval technique is suggested, nevertheless.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207