2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmva.2010.06.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stochastic comparisons of multivariate mixtures

Abstract: a b s t r a c tIn this paper we establish multivariate hazard rate, multivariate reverse hazard rate, and multivariate likelihood ratio stochastic orderings among multivariate random mapping (mixture) distributions. The new results streamline and simplify the proofs of some partial results that have recently appeared in the literature. Some applications in reliability theory and risk management are described.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The proof can also be obtained from Equation and Proposition 3.10 in . Now, let us compare systems with the same structure and with DID components having the same copula but different common distributions.…”
Section: The Main Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The proof can also be obtained from Equation and Proposition 3.10 in . Now, let us compare systems with the same structure and with DID components having the same copula but different common distributions.…”
Section: The Main Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Moreover, it can be used to compare a system with its components (taking h 1 ( u ) = u ). The proofs of (ii) and (iii) can also be obtained from Equation and Propositions 3.6 and 3.8 in , respectively. We must say, here, that when (iv) is used, it might be quite difficult to obtain an explicit expression h1MathClass-bin−1.…”
Section: The Main Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Part (a) is proved by Theorem 1.A.6 of Shaked and Shanthikumar (2007) and the assumption that q 1 ðtÞ 6 st q 2 ðtÞ. Similar to part (a), parts (b) and (c) are proved by using Theorem 2.5 of Khaledi and Shaked (2010) and Theorem 1.C.17 of Shaked and Shanthikumar (2007), respectively, and the corresponding assumptions. h Theorem 3.3.…”
Section: Inactivity Times Of Networkmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The proof for lr-ordering is the same by using[20, Theorem 3.5]. (d) This part can be established in the same way as part (c) by using [33, Theorems 1.B.14 and 1.C.17] for hr-and lr-orderings, respectively.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%