Test of Hypothesis in Assessing Process Capability Index Cpmk

Title & Authors
Test of Hypothesis in Assessing Process Capability Index Cpmk
Cho, Joong-Jae; Yu, Hye-Kyung; Hana, Jung-Su;

Abstract
Higher quality level is generally perceived by customers as improved performance by assigning a correspondingly higher satisfaction score. Usually, the quality level is measured by process capability indices. The index is used to determine whether a production process is capable of producing items within a specified tolerance. The third generation index $\small{C_{pmk}}$ is more powerful than two useful indices $\small{C_p}$ and $\small{C_{pk}}$. which have been widely used in six sigma industries to assess process performance. Most evaluations on process capability indices focus on point estimates, which may result in unreliable assessments of process performance. In this paper, we consider better testing procedure on assessing process capability index $\small{C_{pmk}}$ for practitioners to use in determining whether a given process is capable. It is easy to use the proposed method for assessing process capability index $\small{C_{pmk}}$. Whether a process is clearly normal or nonnormal, our bootstrap testing procedure could be applied effectively without the complexity of calculation. A numerical result based on our proposed method is illustrated.
Keywords
Process capability index;test of hypothesis;p-value;bootstrap method;achieved significance level;monte-carlo experiment;limiting distribution;ASL(achieved significance level);
Language
Korean
Cited by
References
1.
Chen, S. M. and Hsu, N. F. (1995). The asymptotic distribution of the process capability index Cpmk, Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods, 24, 1279-1291.

2.
Cho, J. J., Park, B. S. and Kim, J. S. (1999). Better nonparametric bootstrap confidence intervals for capability index Cpk, The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 12, 45-65.

3.
Cho, J. J., Park, B. S. and Park, H. I. (2004). Better confidence limits for process capability index Cpmk under the assumption of normal process, Journal of the Korean Society for Quality Management, 32, 229-241.

4.
Cho, J. J., Sim, K. Y. and Park, B. S. (2008). Statistical inference for process capability indices and 6 Sigma quality levels, Communications of the Korean Statistical Society, 15, 451-464.

5.
Cho, J. J. and Lim, S. D. (2006) Better statistical test for process capability index \$C_p\$, Journal of the Korean Society for Quality Management, 34, 66-72.

6.
Diciccio, T. J. and Tibshirani, R. (1987). Bootstrap confidence intervals and bootstrap approximations, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 163-170.

7.
Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife, Annals of Statistics, 9, 139-172.

8.
Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. (1993). An Introduction to the Bootstrap, Chapman & Hall, Inc.

9.
Franklin, L. A. and Wasserman, G. S. (1992). Bootstrap lower confidence interval limits for capability indices, Journal of Quality Technology, 24, 196-210.

10.
Hall, P. (1988). Theoretical comparison of bootstrap confidence intervals, Annals of Statistics, 16, 927-953.

11.
Lin, H. C. (2005). Using normal approximation for calculating the p-value in assessing process capability index \$C_{pk}\$, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 25, 160-166.

12.
Lin, P. C. and Pearn, W. L. (2002). Testing process capability for one-sided specification limit with Application to the voltage level translator, Microelectronics Reliability, 42, 1975-1983.

13.
Pearn, W. L., Kotz, S. and Johnson, N. L. (1992). Distributional and inferential properties of process capabiblity indices, Journal of Quality Technology, 24, 216-231.

14.
Pearn, W. L., Yang, S. L., Chen, K. S. and Lin, P. C. (2001). Testing process capability \$C_{pmk}\$ with an application, International Journal of Reliability Quality and Safety Engineering, 8, 15-34.

15.
Wright, P. A. (1998). The probability density function of Process Capability Index \$C_{pmk}\$, Communication in Statistics : Theory and Methods, 27, 1781-1789.