2016
DOI: 10.1080/03610926.2015.1099670
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimal acceptance sampling policy considering Bayesian risks

Abstract: In this paper, we propose a sampling policy considering Bayesian risks. Various definitions of producer"s risk and consumer"s risk have been made. Bayesian risks for both producer and consumer are proven to give better information to decision makers than classical definitions of the risks. So considering the Bayesian risk constraints, we seek to find optimal acceptance sampling policy by minimizing total cost, including the cost of rejecting the batch, the cost of inspection, and the cost of defective items de… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Lira [12] studied the probabilities of incorrectly rejecting or accepting the product using Bayesian statistics. Adibfar et al [13] proposed a sampling scheme assuming Bayesian methods. The Bayesian risks for both consumer and producer provide a better understanding for decision making than the traditional ones.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Lira [12] studied the probabilities of incorrectly rejecting or accepting the product using Bayesian statistics. Adibfar et al [13] proposed a sampling scheme assuming Bayesian methods. The Bayesian risks for both consumer and producer provide a better understanding for decision making than the traditional ones.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The optimal parameters of the Bayesian plan for the Weibull distribution for r=10 and m=0.1 .83807 × 10 −10 1.83807 × 10 −13 6,5 2947.91 6 1000 973.932 4.03624 × 10 −6 4.03624 × 10 −9 3,2 2956.86 8 1000 978.101 0.000149585 1.49585 × 10 −7 2,1 2962.20…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%