Hypothesis Tests: Difference between revisions
Lisa Hacker (talk | contribs) |
Chris Kahn (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 144: | Line 144: | ||
From the standard normal tables with a significance level of 0.10, the critical value is equal to 1.645. If <math>-1.645<U<1.645\,\!</math> then we would fail to reject the hypothesis of no trend. However, since <math>U<-1.645\,\!</math> then an improving trend exists within System 1. If <math>U>1.645\,\!</math> then a deteriorating trend would exist. | From the standard normal tables with a significance level of 0.10, the critical value is equal to 1.645. If <math>-1.645<U<1.645\,\!</math> then we would fail to reject the hypothesis of no trend. However, since <math>U<-1.645\,\!</math> then an improving trend exists within System 1. If <math>U>1.645\,\!</math> then a deteriorating trend would exist. | ||
=Critical Values for Cramér-von Mises Test=<!-- THIS SECTION HEADER IS LINKED FROM: Crow- | =Critical Values for Cramér-von Mises Test=<!-- THIS SECTION HEADER IS LINKED FROM: Crow-AMSAA (NHPP) and RGA_Models_for_Repairable_Systems_Analysis. IF YOU RENAME THE SECTION, YOU MUST UPDATE THE LINK(S). --> | ||
The following table displays the critical values for the Cramér-von Mises goodness-of-fit test given the sample size, <math>M\,\!</math>, and the significance level, <math>\alpha \,\!</math>. | The following table displays the critical values for the Cramér-von Mises goodness-of-fit test given the sample size, <math>M\,\!</math>, and the significance level, <math>\alpha \,\!</math>. | ||
Line 201: | Line 201: | ||
|} | |} | ||
For application of the Cramér-von Mises critical values, refer to the [[Crow- | For application of the Cramér-von Mises critical values, refer to the [[Crow-AMSAA (NHPP)#Cram.C3.A9r-von_Mises_Test_for_Individual_Failure_Times|Crow-AMSAA (NHPP)]] chapter and [[RGA_Models_for_Repairable_Systems_Analysis#Goodness-of-Fit_Tests_for_Repairable_System_Analysis|Repairable Systems Analysis]] chapter. |
Revision as of 21:27, 22 January 2014
Common Beta Hypothesis Test
The common beta hypothesis (CBH) test is applicable to the following data types: multiple systems-concurrent operating times, repairable and fleet. As shown by Crow [17], suppose that [math]\displaystyle{ K\,\! }[/math] number of systems are under test. Each system has an intensity function given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{u}_{q}}(t)={{\lambda }_{q}}{{\beta }_{q}}{{t}^{{{\beta }_{q}}-1}}\,\! }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ q=1,\ldots ,K\,\! }[/math]. You can compare the intensity functions of each of the systems by comparing the [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{q}}\,\! }[/math] of each system. When conducting an analysis of data consisting of multiple systems, you expect that each of the systems performed in a similar manner. In particular, you would expect the interarrival rate of the failures across the systems to be fairly consistent. Therefore, the CBH test evaluates the hypothesis, [math]\displaystyle{ {{H}_{o}}\,\! }[/math], such that [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{1}}={{\beta }_{2}}=\ldots ={{\beta }_{K}}\,\! }[/math]. Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\tilde{\beta }}_{q}}\,\! }[/math] denote the conditional maximum likelihood estimate of [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{q}}\,\! }[/math], which is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\tilde{\beta }}_{q}}=\frac{\underset{q=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop{\sum }}}\,{{M}_{q}}}{\underset{q=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop{\sum }}}\,\underset{i=1}{\overset{{{M}_{q}}}{\mathop{\sum }}}\,\ln \left( \tfrac{{{T}_{q}}}{{{X}_{iq}}} \right)}\,\! }[/math]
where:
- [math]\displaystyle{ K=1.\,\! }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{q}}={{N}_{q}}\,\! }[/math] if data on the [math]\displaystyle{ {{q}^{th}}\,\! }[/math] system is time terminated or [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{q}}=({{N}_{q}}-1)\,\! }[/math] if data on the [math]\displaystyle{ {{q}^{th}}\,\! }[/math] system is failure terminated ( [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{q}}\,\! }[/math] is the number of failures on the [math]\displaystyle{ {{q}^{th}}\,\! }[/math] system).
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{X}_{iq}}\,\! }[/math] is the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}}\,\! }[/math] time-to-failure on the [math]\displaystyle{ {{q}^{th}}\,\! }[/math] system.
Then for each system, assume that:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \chi _{q}^{2}=\frac{2{{M}_{q}}{{\beta }_{q}}}{{{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{q}}}\,\! }[/math]
are conditionally distributed as independent chi-squared random variables with [math]\displaystyle{ 2{{M}_{q}}\,\! }[/math] degrees of freedom. When [math]\displaystyle{ K=2\,\! }[/math], you can test the null hypothesis, [math]\displaystyle{ {{H}_{o}}\,\! }[/math], using the following statistic:
- [math]\displaystyle{ F=\frac{\tfrac{\chi _{1}^{2}}{2{{M}_{1}}}}{\tfrac{\chi _{2}^{2}}{2{{M}_{2}}}}\,\! }[/math]
If [math]\displaystyle{ {{H}_{o}}\,\! }[/math] is true, then [math]\displaystyle{ F\,\! }[/math] equals [math]\displaystyle{ \tfrac{{{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{2}}}{{{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{1}}}\,\! }[/math] and conditionally has an F-distribution with [math]\displaystyle{ (2{{M}_{1}},2{{M}_{2}})\,\! }[/math] degrees of freedom. The critical value, [math]\displaystyle{ F\,\! }[/math], can then be determined by referring to the chi-squared tables. Now, if [math]\displaystyle{ K\ge 2\,\! }[/math], then the likelihood ratio procedure can be used to test the hypothesis [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{1}}={{\beta }_{2}}=\ldots ={{\beta }_{K}}\,\! }[/math], as discussed in Crow [17]. Consider the following statistic:
- [math]\displaystyle{ L=\underset{q=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,{{M}_{q}}\ln ({{\tilde{\beta }}_{q}})-M\ln ({{\beta }^{*}})\,\! }[/math]
where:
- [math]\displaystyle{ M=\underset{q=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop{\sum }}}\,{{M}_{q}}\,\! }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }^{*}}=\tfrac{M}{\underset{q=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop{\sum }}}\,\tfrac{{{M}_{q}}}{{{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{q}}}}\,\! }[/math]
Also, let:
- [math]\displaystyle{ a=1+\frac{1}{6(K-1)}\left[ \underset{q=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,\frac{1}{{{M}_{q}}}-\frac{1}{M} \right]\,\! }[/math]
Calculate the statistic [math]\displaystyle{ D\,\! }[/math], such that:
- [math]\displaystyle{ D=\frac{2L}{a}\,\! }[/math]
The statistic [math]\displaystyle{ D\,\! }[/math] is approximately distributed as a chi-squared random variable with [math]\displaystyle{ (K-1)\,\! }[/math] degrees of freedom. Then after calculating [math]\displaystyle{ D\,\! }[/math], refer to the chi-squared tables with [math]\displaystyle{ (K-1)\,\! }[/math] degrees of freedom to determine the critical points. [math]\displaystyle{ {{H}_{o}}\,\! }[/math] is true if the statistic [math]\displaystyle{ D\,\! }[/math] falls between the critical points.
Common Beta Hypothesis Example
Consider the data in the following table.
Repairable system data | |||
System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
Start | 0 | 0 | 0 |
End | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 |
Failures | 1.2 | 1.4 | 0.3 |
55.6 | 35 | 32.6 | |
72.7 | 46.8 | 33.4 | |
111.9 | 65.9 | 241.7 | |
121.9 | 181.1 | 396.2 | |
303.6 | 712.6 | 444.4 | |
326.9 | 1005.7 | 480.8 | |
1568.4 | 1029.9 | 588.9 | |
1913.5 | 1675.7 | 1043.9 | |
1787.5 | 1136.1 | ||
1867 | 1288.1 | ||
1408.1 | |||
1439.4 | |||
1604.8 |
Given that the intensity function for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{q}^{th}}\,\! }[/math] system is [math]\displaystyle{ {{u}_{q}}(t)={{\lambda }_{q}}{{\beta }_{q}}{{t}^{{{\beta }_{q}}-1}}\,\! }[/math], test the hypothesis that [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{1}}={{\beta }_{2}}\,\! }[/math] while assuming a significance level equal to 0.05. Calculate the maximum likelihood estimates of [math]\displaystyle{ {{\tilde{\beta }}_{1}}\,\! }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\tilde{\beta }}_{2}}\,\! }[/math]. Therefore:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & {{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{1}}= & 0.3753 \\ & {{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{2}}= & 0.4657 \end{align}\,\! }[/math]
Then [math]\displaystyle{ \tfrac{{{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{2}}}{{{{\tilde{\beta }}}_{1}}}=1.2408\,\! }[/math]. Calculate the statistic [math]\displaystyle{ F\,\! }[/math] with a significance level of 0.05.
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} F=2.0980 \end{align}\,\! }[/math]
Since [math]\displaystyle{ 1.2408\lt 2.0980\,\! }[/math] we fail to reject the null hypothesis that [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{1}}={{\beta }_{2}}\,\! }[/math] at the 5% significance level.
Now suppose that we test the hypothesis that [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{1}}={{\beta }_{2}}={{\beta }_{3}}\,\! }[/math]. Calculate the statistic [math]\displaystyle{ D\,\! }[/math].
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} D=0.5260 \end{align}\,\! }[/math]
Using the chi-square tables with [math]\displaystyle{ K-1=2\,\! }[/math] degrees of freedom, the critical values at the 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles are 0.1026 and 5.9915, respectively. Since [math]\displaystyle{ 0.1026\lt D\lt 5.9915\,\! }[/math], we fail to reject the null hypothesis that [math]\displaystyle{ {{\beta }_{1}}={{\beta }_{2}}={{\beta }_{3}}\,\! }[/math] at the 5% significance level.
Laplace Trend Test
The Laplace trend test evaluates the hypothesis that a trend does not exist within the data. The Laplace trend test is applicable to the following data types: multiple systems-concurrent operating times, repairable and fleet. The Laplace trend test can determine whether the system is deteriorating, improving, or if there is no trend at all. Calculate the test statistic, [math]\displaystyle{ U\,\! }[/math], using the following equation:
- [math]\displaystyle{ U=\frac{\tfrac{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{\mathop{\sum }}}\,{{X}_{i}}}{N}-\tfrac{T}{2}}{T\sqrt{\tfrac{1}{12N}}}\,\! }[/math]
where:
- [math]\displaystyle{ T\,\! }[/math] = total operating time (termination time)
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{X}_{i}}\,\! }[/math] = age of the system at the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}}\,\! }[/math] successive failure
- [math]\displaystyle{ N\,\! }[/math] = total number of failures
The test statistic [math]\displaystyle{ U\,\! }[/math] is approximately a standard normal random variable. The critical value is read from the standard normal tables with a given significance level, [math]\displaystyle{ \alpha \,\! }[/math].
Laplace Trend Test Example
Consider once again the data given in the table above. Check for a trend within System 1 assuming a significance level of 0.10. Calculate the test statistic [math]\displaystyle{ U\,\! }[/math] for System 1.
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} U=-2.6121 \end{align}\,\! }[/math]
From the standard normal tables with a significance level of 0.10, the critical value is equal to 1.645. If [math]\displaystyle{ -1.645\lt U\lt 1.645\,\! }[/math] then we would fail to reject the hypothesis of no trend. However, since [math]\displaystyle{ U\lt -1.645\,\! }[/math] then an improving trend exists within System 1. If [math]\displaystyle{ U\gt 1.645\,\! }[/math] then a deteriorating trend would exist.
Critical Values for Cramér-von Mises Test
The following table displays the critical values for the Cramér-von Mises goodness-of-fit test given the sample size, [math]\displaystyle{ M\,\! }[/math], and the significance level, [math]\displaystyle{ \alpha \,\! }[/math].
Critical values for Cramér-von Mises test | |||||
[math]\displaystyle{ \alpha \,\! }[/math] | |||||
[math]\displaystyle{ M\,\! }[/math] | 0.20 | 0.15 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.01 |
2 | 0.138 | 0.149 | 0.162 | 0.175 | 0.186 |
3 | 0.121 | 0.135 | 0.154 | 0.184 | 0.23 |
4 | 0.121 | 0.134 | 0.155 | 0.191 | 0.28 |
5 | 0.121 | 0.137 | 0.160 | 0.199 | 0.30 |
6 | 0.123 | 0.139 | 0.162 | 0.204 | 0.31 |
7 | 0.124 | 0.140 | 0.165 | 0.208 | 0.32 |
8 | 0.124 | 0.141 | 0.165 | 0.210 | 0.32 |
9 | 0.125 | 0.142 | 0.167 | 0.212 | 0.32 |
10 | 0.125 | 0.142 | 0.167 | 0.212 | 0.32 |
11 | 0.126 | 0.143 | 0.169 | 0.214 | 0.32 |
12 | 0.126 | 0.144 | 0.169 | 0.214 | 0.32 |
13 | 0.126 | 0.144 | 0.169 | 0.214 | 0.33 |
14 | 0.126 | 0.144 | 0.169 | 0.214 | 0.33 |
15 | 0.126 | 0.144 | 0.169 | 0.215 | 0.33 |
16 | 0.127 | 0.145 | 0.171 | 0.216 | 0.33 |
17 | 0.127 | 0.145 | 0.171 | 0.217 | 0.33 |
18 | 0.127 | 0.146 | 0.171 | 0.217 | 0.33 |
19 | 0.127 | 0.146 | 0.171 | 0.217 | 0.33 |
20 | 0.128 | 0.146 | 0.172 | 0.217 | 0.33 |
30 | 0.128 | 0.146 | 0.172 | 0.218 | 0.33 |
60 | 0.128 | 0.147 | 0.173 | 0.220 | 0.33 |
100 | 0.129 | 0.147 | 0.173 | 0.220 | 0.34 |
For application of the Cramér-von Mises critical values, refer to the Crow-AMSAA (NHPP) chapter and Repairable Systems Analysis chapter.