IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/lstaxx/v51y2022i3p685-700.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance comparison of generalized confidence interval and modified sampling distribution approaches for assessing one-sided capability indices with gauge measurement errors

Author

Listed:
  • Dwi Yuli Rakhmawati
  • Kwang-Jae Kim
  • Sumiati

Abstract

This study compares the performances of the generalized confidence interval (GCI) and the modified sampling distribution (MSD) approaches in evaluating the capability of processes with one-sided tolerance under the presence of gauge measurement errors (GME). The performance of both approaches are measured through a series of simulation. In terms of coverage rates (CRs), GCI and MSD approaches appear to work satisfactorily in the presence of GME since the CRs of the lower confidence bound with considering GME were all close to the nominal value. Furthermore, some of the coverage rates with considering the GME of GCI approach were smaller than those of MSD approach. GCI approach has better ability to assess process capability in the presence of GME. Based on numerical results, both approaches can be recommended to practitioners who assess process performances for cases with one-sided tolerance when GME is actually inevitable.

Suggested Citation

  • Dwi Yuli Rakhmawati & Kwang-Jae Kim & Sumiati, 2022. "Performance comparison of generalized confidence interval and modified sampling distribution approaches for assessing one-sided capability indices with gauge measurement errors," Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(3), pages 685-700, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:lstaxx:v:51:y:2022:i:3:p:685-700
    DOI: 10.1080/03610926.2020.1752729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03610926.2020.1752729
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03610926.2020.1752729?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:lstaxx:v:51:y:2022:i:3:p:685-700. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/lsta .

    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.