Research Article
Designing Bayesian Sampling Plans with Adaptive Progressive Hybrid Censored Samples
Table 4
Comparison of performance of
and
for type-II APHCS sampling plans with
,
,
, and
.
| | Case | | | | | | () | MBR | () |
| | 1 | 0.06308 | 2.62129 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 7.1844 | 7.1844 | 2.6875 | | 2 | 0.67575 | 2.78271 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.3333 | 6.7917 | 6.7917 | 3.5000 | | 3 | 2.03725 | 2.04206 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.3333 | 6.9126 | 6.9126 | 4.4375 | | 4 | 3.15223 | 1.33561 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0000 | 6.9878 | 6.9878 | 5.0000 | | 5 | 3.93121 | 0.80140 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.8000 | 7.0326 | 7.0326 | 5.0000 | | 6 | 4.42121 | 0.44683 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.6667 | 7.0347 | 7.0347 | 5.0000 | | 7 | 4.85670 | 0.11555 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5000 | 6.9722 | 6.9722 | 5.0000 | | 8 | 3.54287 | 0.85895 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0667 | 7.4685 | 7.4685 | 5.0000 | | 9 | 2.96377 | 1.20026 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.3333 | 7.4974 | 7.4974 | 5.0000 | | 10 | 0.06308 | 1.87578 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 4.0000 | 7.9389 | 7.9389 | 1.9167 | | 11 | 0.06308 | 1.57732 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 5.3333 | 8.9737 | 8.9738 | 1.6094 | | 12 | 0.06323 | 1.42382 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 10.0000 | 12.9870 | 12.9870 | 1.4500 | | 13 | 0.06315 | 1.16829 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 20.0000 | 22.7314 | 22.7314 | 1.1875 | | 14 | 1.24436 | 2.16953 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 7.9139 | 7.9139 | 3.6250 | | 15 | 1.74789 | 1.86820 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 8.1161 | 8.1161 | 4.0938 | | 16 | 2.11415 | 1.65069 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 8.2648 | 8.2648 | 4.5625 | | 17 | 2.95052 | 1.15990 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 8.6104 | 8.6104 | 5.0000 | | 18 | 3.44830 | 0.87201 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 8.8203 | 8.8203 | 5.0000 | | 19 | 3.73003 | 0.71057 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 8.9406 | 8.9406 | 5.0000 | | 20 | 0.06308 | 2.62918 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0000 | 3.6923 | 3.6923 | 2.6875 | | 21 | 0.06308 | 2.62392 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.3333 | 6.0203 | 6.0203 | 2.6875 | | 22 | 0.06308 | 2.61866 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 2.4000 | 8.0817 | 8.0817 | 2.6875 | | 23 | 0.06308 | 2.61866 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 3.2000 | 8.8817 | 8.8817 | 2.6875 | | 24 | 0.06308 | 2.61866 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 4.0000 | 9.6817 | 9.6817 | 2.6875 | | 25 | 0.06308 | 2.61866 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 8.0000 | 13.6817 | 13.6817 | 2.6875 | | 26 | 0.12616 | 2.62129 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 7.2474 | 7.2475 | 2.6875 | | 27 | 0.18924 | 2.62129 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 7.3105 | 7.3107 | 2.6875 | | 28 | 0.25232 | 2.62129 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 7.3736 | 7.3739 | 2.6875 | | 29 | 0.37848 | 2.62129 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 7.4998 | 7.5002 | 2.6875 | | 30 | 0.63079 | 2.62129 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 7.7521 | 7.7528 | 2.6875 | | 31 | 1.26159 | 2.62129 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 2.0000 | 8.3829 | 7.3844 | 2.6875 |
|
|
: the Bayes risk of the sampling plan .
(): the recalculated Bayes risk .
MBR: the Bayes risk reported in Lin and Huang [3].
|
