MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386742087 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2023.6.001

Neutrosophic multivariate EWMA control chart

2023· article· en· W4386742087 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wibawati Wibawati, Muhammad Ahsan, Hidayatul Khusna

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEWMA chartControl chartChartMultivariate statisticsX-bar chartStatisticsShewhart individuals control chartStandard deviationComputer scienceRadar chartData miningProcess (computing)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The MEWMA chart is one of the traditional multivariate charts which are widely employed in inspecting the quality of manufacturing and services. This chart is created through monitoring the small shifts of mean vectors of variable quality characteristics. Often in practice, the measurement of a quality characteristic produces uncertain, incomplete values, so that ambiguous numbers are obtained. In this condition, a neutrosophic-based control chart can overcome the problem resulting from the ambiguous data. The paper’s objective is to construct a new multivariate monitoring scheme based on a neutrosophic chart, namely the neutrosophic Multivariate EWMA (NMEWMA). Furthermore, the performance of the new multivariate monitoring scheme is evaluated in detecting process shifts employing the Average Run Length (ARL) and Standard Deviation Run Length (SDRL). This control chart is an innovation in the quality monitoring of uncertain data. The research result obtained indicates that the NMEWMA chart performs better than the MEWMA in finding the small mean shifts as well as in the real case application.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207