A new multiple dependent state sampling plan based on the process capability index

References

• Aslam, M., M. Azam, and C.-H. Jun. 2013. Multiple dependent state sampling plan based on process capability index. Journal of Testing and Evaluation 41 (2):340–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aslam, M., M. Azam, and C.-H. Jun. 2015. A new lot inspection procedure based on exponentially weighted moving average. International Journal of Systems Science 46 (8):1392–400. doi:10.1080/00207721.2013.822128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aslam, M., C.-W. Wu, M. Azam, and C.-H. Jun. 2013. Variable sampling inspection for resubmitted lots based on process capability index Cpk for normally distributed items. Applied Mathematical Modelling 37 (3):667–75. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2012.02.048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aslam, M., C.-W. Wu, C.-H. Jun, M. Azam, and I. Negrin. 2013. Developing a variables repetitive group sampling plan based on process capability index Cpk with unknown mean and variance. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 83 (8):1507–17. doi:10.1080/00949655.2012.663374.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balakrishnan, N., V. Leiva, and J. Lopez. 2007. Acceptance sampling plans from truncated life tests based on the generalized Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation 36 (3):643–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balamurali, S., and C.-H. Jun. 2006. Repetitive group sampling procedure for variables inspection. Journal of Applied Statistics 33 (3):327–38. doi:10.1080/02664760500446010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balamurali, S., and C.-H. Jun. 2007. Multiple dependent state sampling plans for lot acceptance based on measurement data. European Journal of Operational Research 180 (3):1221–30. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.05.025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balamurali, S., Park, H., C.-H. Jun, K.-J. Kim, and J. Lee. 2005. Designing of variables repetitive group sampling plan involving minimum average sample number. Communications in Statistics – Simulation and Computation 34 (3):799–809. doi:10.1081/SAC-200068424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balamurali, S., and M. Usha. 2014. Optimal designing of variables quick switching system based on the process capability index Cpk. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 31 (2):85–94.
   Google Scholar
• Balamurali, S., and M. Usha. 2015. Optimal designing of variables sampling plan for resubmitted lots. Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation 44 (5):1210–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borget, I., I. Laville, A. Paci, S. Michiels, L. Mercier, R. Desmaris, and P. Bourget. 2006. Application of an acceptance sampling plan for post-production quality control of chemotherapeutic batches in an hospital pharmacy. European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics 64 (1):92–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, L. K., S. W. Cheng, and F. A. Spiring. 1988. A new measure of process capability: Cpm. Journal of Quality Technology 20 (3):162–75. doi:10.1080/00224065.1988.11979102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gharaibeh, N. G., L. Liu, and S. S. Wani. 2012. Skip-lot acceptance sampling plans for highway construction and materials. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 138 (7):791–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindaraju, K., and S. Balamurali. 1998. Chain sampling plan for variables inspection. Journal of Applied Statistics 25 (1):103–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamaker, H. C. 1979. Acceptance sampling for percent defective by variables and by attributes. Journal of Quality Technology 11 (3):139–48. doi:10.1080/00224065.1979.11980895.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, V. E. 1986. Process capability indices. Journal of Quality Technology 18 (1):41–52. doi:10.1080/00224065.1986.11978984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kao, J. H. K. 1971. MIL-STD-414: Sampling procedures and tables for inspection by variables for percent defective. Journal of Quality Technology 3 (1):28–37.
   Google Scholar
• Kotz, S., and N. L. Johnson. 2002. Process capability indices: A review, 1992-2000. Journal of Quality Technology 34 (1):2–19. doi:10.1080/00224065.2002.11980119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Negrin, I., Y. Parmet, and E. Schechtman. 2009. Developing a sampling plan based on Cpk. Quality Engineering 21 :306–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Negrin, I., Y. Parmet, and E. Schechtman. 2011. Developing a sampling plan based on Cpk-unknown variance. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 27 (1):3–14. doi:10.1002/qre.1094.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nocedal, J., and S. J. Wright. 1999. Numerical optimization. New York: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Pearn, W., and P.-C. Lin. 2004. Testing process performance based on capability index Cpk with critical value. Computers and Industrial Engineering 47 (4):351–69. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2003.03.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearn, W., and C.-W. Wu. 2006. Critical acceptance values and sample sizes of a variables sampling plan for very low fraction of defectives. Omega 34 (1):90–101. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2004.08.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearn, W., and C.-W. Wu. 2006. Variables sampling plans with PPM fraction of defectives and process loss consideration. Journal of the Operational Research Society 57 (4):450–9. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearn, W., and C.-W. Wu. 2007. An effective decision making method for product acceptance. Omega 35 (1):12–21. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2005.01.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pepelyshev, A., Steland, A., and A. Avellan, ‐Hampe. 2014. Acceptance sampling plans for photovoltaic modules with two‐sided specification limits. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 22 (6):603–11. doi:10.1002/pip.2306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherman, R. E. 1965. Design and evaluation of a repetitive group sampling plan. Technometrics 7 (1):11–21. doi:10.1080/00401706.1965.10490222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soundararajan, V., and R. Vijayaraghavan. 1990. Construction and selection of multiple dependent (deferred) state sampling plan. Journal of Applied Statistics 17 (3):397–409. doi:10.1080/02664769000000012.
   Google Scholar
• Spiring, F., B. Leung, S. Cheng, and A. Yeung. 2003. A bibliography of process capability papers. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 19 (5):445–60. doi:10.1002/qre.538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suresh, R., and T. Ramanathan. 1997. Acceptance sampling plans by variables for a class of symmetric distributions. Communications in Statistics – Simulation and Computation 26 (4):1379–91. doi:10.1080/03610919708813445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaerst, R. 1982. A procedure to construct multiple deferred state sampling plan. Methods of Operations Research 37 :477–85.
   Google Scholar
• Wald, A. 1945. Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 16(2):117–86. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731118.
   Google Scholar
• Wortham, A. W., and R. C. Baker. 1976. Multiple deferred state sampling inspection. The International Journal of Production Research 14 (6):719–31. doi:10.1080/00207547608956391.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, C.-W., and W. L. Pearn. 2008. A variables sampling plan based on Cpmk for product acceptance determination. European Journal of Operational Research 184 (2):549–60. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.11.032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, C.-W., A. H. I. Lee, and Y.-W. Chen. 2016. A novel lot sentencing method by variables inspection considering multiple dependent state. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 32 (3):985–94. doi:10.1002/qre.1808.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yen, C.-H., M. Aslam, and C.-H. Jun. 2014. A lot inspection sampling plan based on EWMA yield index. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 75 (5–8):861–8. doi:10.1007/s00170-014-6174-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yum, B. J., and K. W. Kim. 2011. A bibliography of the literature on process capability indices: 2000–2009. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 27 (3):251–68. doi:10.1002/qre.1115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar