IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijrsaf/v2y2008i4p265-285.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of statistical approaches for assessing reliability

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Matthew Aughenbaugh
  • Jeffrey W. Herrmann

Abstract

Reliability estimates are useful for making design decisions. We consider the case where a designer must choose between an existing component whose reliability is well-established and a new component that has an unknown reliability. This paper compares the statistical approaches for updating reliability assessments based on additional simulation or experimental data. We consider four statistical approaches for modelling the uncertainty about a new component's failure probability: a classical approach, a precise Bayesian approach, a robust Bayesian approach and an imprecise probability approach. We show that an imprecise beta model is compatible with both the robust Bayesian approach and the imprecise probability approach. The different approaches for forming and updating the designer's beliefs about the product reliability are illustrated and compared under different scenarios of available information. The goal is to gain insight into the relative strengths and weaknesses of the approaches. Examples are presented for illustrating the conclusions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Matthew Aughenbaugh & Jeffrey W. Herrmann, 2008. "A comparison of statistical approaches for assessing reliability," International Journal of Reliability and Safety, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(4), pages 265-285.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijrsaf:v:2:y:2008:i:4:p:265-285
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=22077
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijrsaf:v:2:y:2008:i:4:p:265-285. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=98 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.