2.3.5 Situation 4 Theorem (2.3.4) : Assume N γ 1 , γ , p, p' are given. , 2 There exists a minimum regret A plan with a = a p p '/ p ' j −1 / p j − 1 < j j j −1 j , if ….(2.3.10) Proof: Suppose there does not exist an optimal A plan with a j-1 = a j , but the given condition is satisfied. Let us suppose (a 1 ,…,a j-1 , a j ,..,a r ) is an optimal A plan with a j-1 < a j . Let us use the notation ( j ) a [ 1 2 j −1 j r 1 2 j − j−1 1 ∆ PA ( a , a ,..., a , a ,..., a ; m , m ,..., m , m ,..., m )] = = PA ( a1 ,...., a j −1 , a j ,..., a r ; m1 ,..., mr ) − PA( a1 ,..., a j −1 , a j −1 , a j + 1 ,..., a r ; m 1 ,..., mr ) a1 = ∑ ∑ ... ∑ ∏ g ( xi , mi ) ∑ g ( x j −1 , m j −1 ) g ( a j − x( j −1 ) , m j ) . x1 = 0 a2 − x(1) x2 = 0 a j−2 − x( j−3) j −2 x j−2 = 0 i= 1 a j−1 − x( j−2 ) x j−1 = 0 j r a ' j+ 1 a ' j+ 2 − x j+ 1 a ' r −( x j+ 1 + x j+ 2 + ,... + xr− 1 ) r ∑ ∑ ..... ∑ ∏ g ( xi , mi ) x = 0 x = 0 x = 0 i= j + 1 j+ 1 Where , a ' = a − a , ∀i ≥ j + 1. i i j+ 2 j Since (a 1 ,…,a j ,…,a r ) must satisfy the optimal criteria, r ( j ) a j −1 …(2.3.11) ∆ RA, ≤ 0 where the notation represents the difference of the regret function value for the A plan as explained in the proofs of theorems 2.3.2 and 2.3.3. The condition is equivalent to, ( γ 2 ≤ 1 / γ Exp m′ 1 ). (-( -m)). S A S A i = j − 2 ∏ h( x m′ i , i ) i = 1 a j i = j − 2 ∏ h( x i , m i ) i = 1 A j −1 − x ( j − 2) i = r ∑ h( x ∏ ′ j −1 , m' j −1 ) h( a j − x ( j −1) , m' j ) S B h( x i , m i ) x j −1 = 0 i = j + 1 −1 − x ( j − 2) i = r ∑ h( x j −1101 , m j −1 ) h( A j − x ( j −1) , m j ) S B ∏ h( x i , m i ) x j −1 = 0 i = j + 1
….(2.3.12) Here S A denotes the summation with respect to x 1 , x 2 ,…, x j-1 over the specified domain in (2.3.11) and S B denotes the summation with respect to x j+1 ,x j+2 , …, x r over the specified domain on the same expression. The respective domains are indicated in (2.3.11) For any set of x 1 , x 2 ,…,x j-1 included in LHS of (2.3.12) we find that the following fraction: a − x j−1 ( j−2) ∑ x = 0 j−1 a − x j−1 ( j−2) ∑ x = 0 j−1 ⎛ m' ⎜ ≥ ⎜ m ⎝ j −1 j −1 a ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ h( x h( x j −1 j −1 , m' − x j ( j − 2) , m . j −1 j −1 ) h( a ) h( a j j − x − x ( j −1) ( j −1) , m' , m j j ) ) ⎛ m' ⎜ ≥ ⎜ m ⎝ j−1 j−1 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ a − x j−1 ( j−2) ⎛ m' ⎜ ⎜ m ⎝ j j ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ a −a j j−1 ∴ LHS of (2.3.12 ) ≥ ( γ / γ ). Exp(-( m′ -m)).( m' /m 2 1 j-1 j−1 ) a j − x ( j−2 ) S S A A i= j −2 ∏ h( x , m′ ) S i= 1 i= j −2 ∏ h( x i= 1 i i , m i i ) S B i= i= r ∏ h( x , ′ i mi ) j + 1 . = r ∏ h( x , m ) i B i= j + 1 i i Thus the value of the above expression is less than or equal to 1. … (2.3.13) We now compare the regret function of two A kind <strong>plans</strong>, one with (j-1) th <strong>acceptance</strong> number raised to a j and the other with (j-1) th <strong>acceptance</strong> number as a j -1, whereas the other <strong>acceptance</strong> number are retained unchanged in both the <strong>plans</strong>. Since, PA , a ,..., a , a ,..., a m , m ,..., m , m ,..., m ) ( a 1 2 j j r , 1 2 j j + 1 r - PA , a ,..., a − 1, a ,..., a , m , m ,..., m , m ,..., m ) = ( a 1 2 j j r 1 2 j j + 1 r 102
- Page 1 and 2:
Multiattribute acceptance sampling
- Page 3 and 4:
e) the cost functions are linear an
- Page 5 and 6:
Contents 0.1 Purpose of sampling in
- Page 7 and 8:
Part 0 : Introduction 0.1 Purpose o
- Page 9 and 10:
ectification is defined by setting
- Page 11 and 12:
procurement of materials of the US
- Page 13 and 14:
average defective from such a proce
- Page 15 and 16:
0.4 Scope of the present inquiry 0.
- Page 17 and 18:
0.4.6 A generalized acceptance samp
- Page 19 and 20:
sembled units the general practice
- Page 21 and 22:
with the above purpose in mind. The
- Page 23 and 24:
equals to p i in the long run. We a
- Page 25 and 26:
m j , r∏ −P C j ′ = g(x j , m
- Page 27 and 28:
show that if we increase c 2 keepin
- Page 29 and 30:
independence and mutually exclusive
- Page 31 and 32:
different sampling schemes in terms
- Page 33 and 34:
curves i.e. the OC curve as a funct
- Page 35 and 36:
0.5.3 Part3 Bayesian multiattribute
- Page 37 and 38:
K(N, n)/(A 1 − R 1 ) = nk ′ s +
- Page 39 and 40:
example, a sample of finished garme
- Page 41 and 42:
...(1.1.2) If now X i is assumed to
- Page 43 and 44:
(i) Poisson as approximation to bin
- Page 45 and 46:
1.2 Multiattribute sampling schemes
- Page 47 and 48:
We take this case and the case of t
- Page 49 and 50:
highest with respect to critical de
- Page 51 and 52:
...(1.2.4) Note that, for single at
- Page 53 and 54:
...(1.2.7) To compare the relative
- Page 55 and 56: Corollary For ρ 2 /ρ 1 > c 2 /c 1
- Page 57 and 58: increasing in each a i . Note that
- Page 59 and 60: Figure 1.2.1 Absolute value of Slop
- Page 61 and 62: Table 1.2.5: Three attribute A kind
- Page 63 and 64: Table 1.2.5 (contd.): Three attribu
- Page 65 and 66: Table 1.2.5 (contd.) : Three attrib
- Page 67 and 68: Table 1.2.5 (contd.) : Three attrib
- Page 69 and 70: 1.3 Multiattribute sampling plans o
- Page 71 and 72: Let M 2 < M 1 . Then G(c 1 , M 1 ρ
- Page 73 and 74: α, β, and ρ. For α = 0.05, β =
- Page 75 and 76: ma β (a 1 , a 2 , ρ) = m ′ ...(
- Page 77 and 78: Table:1.3.2: Construction parameter
- Page 79 and 80: 1.3.5 D kind plans of given strengt
- Page 81 and 82: Figure 1.3.1: The sketch of the fun
- Page 83 and 84: 2.1 General cost models 2.1.1 Scope
- Page 85 and 86: (j) Interaction of scrappable attri
- Page 87 and 88: use of defective item is additive o
- Page 89 and 90: 2.1.5 Approximation under Poisson c
- Page 91 and 92: 2.2 The expected cost model for dis
- Page 93 and 94: P (p (j) ) denotes the probability
- Page 95 and 96: 250 200 Figure 2.2.1 : Lot Quality
- Page 97 and 98: Table 2. 2. 1 Testing goodness of f
- Page 99 and 100: 2. 3 Cost of MASSP's of A kind 2.3.
- Page 101 and 102: From (2.3.2) we observe that γ 2 1
- Page 103 and 104: ( γ / ) 2 γ − ( m′− m e ) /
- Page 105: We now consider the following funct
- Page 109 and 110: ∴There exists an optimal A plan f
- Page 111 and 112: Hence, Q(m) = 1 − P (m) has the s
- Page 113 and 114: where a 0 and n 0 are the parameter
- Page 115 and 116: where, p = (p 1 , p 2 , ..., p r )
- Page 117 and 118: situations as above. For the third
- Page 119 and 120: 2.5.3 Optimal Bayesian plans in sit
- Page 121 and 122: Table 2.5.2 : Optimal multi attribu
- Page 123 and 124: Annexure Microsoft Visual Basic pro
- Page 125 and 126: If Regret,OMREGRET(c3-1) Tjem Prevo
- Page 127 and 128: 3.1 Bayesian single sampling multia
- Page 129 and 130: f(p i , ¯p i , s i )dp i = e −v
- Page 131 and 132: easonable to assume that the p i
- Page 133 and 134: the minimum cost is obtained at a 1
- Page 135 and 136: Table 3.1.1 (Contd.) : Results of 1
- Page 137 and 138: Table 3.1.2 : Testing goodness of f
- Page 139 and 140: Figure 3.1.1 : Scatter plots of num
- Page 141 and 142: Figure 3.1.2: Sketch of the cost fu
- Page 143 and 144: Annexure Microsoft Visual Basic pro
- Page 145 and 146: References Ailor, R. B., Schmidt, J
- Page 147 and 148: Copenhagen. Hamaker, H. C. (1950).
- Page 149: Taylor, E. F. (1957). Discovery sam