dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-06T15:25:44Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-19T18:27:03Z
dc.date.available2019-10-06T15:25:44Z
dc.date.available2022-12-19T18:27:03Z
dc.date.created2019-10-06T15:25:44Z
dc.date.issued2019-09-02
dc.identifierCommunications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, v. 48, n. 17, p. 4294-4301, 2019.
dc.identifier1532-415X
dc.identifier0361-0926
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/187108
dc.identifier10.1080/03610926.2018.1494284
dc.identifier2-s2.0-85057308633
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/5368146
dc.description.abstractWhen the mixed chart proposed by Aslam et al. (2015) is in use, the sample items are classified as defective or not defective and, depending on the number of defectives, the quality characteristic X of the sample items are also measured. In this case, an Xbar chart decides the state of the process. The previous conforming/non-conforming classification truncates the X distribution and, because of that, the mathematical development to obtain the ARLs is complex. Aslam et al. (2015) didn’t pay attention to the fact that the X distribution is truncated and, due to that, they obtained incorrect ARLs.
dc.languageeng
dc.relationCommunications in Statistics - Theory and Methods
dc.rightsAcesso aberto
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectaverage sample size
dc.subjectinspection by attribute and by variable
dc.subjectMixed chart
dc.subjecttruncated distribution
dc.titleThe performance of the truncated mixed control chart
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución