Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The detection of an upward shift in the fraction defective of a repetitive process is considered using the geometric CUSUM. This CUSUM makes use of the information provided by the run-lengths of non-defective items between successive defective items, and was initially developed for the case of 100% inspection. This paper considers the geometric CUSUM under sampling inspection, and emphasizes that the pattern of sampling inspection can be quite haphazard without causing any difficulty for the operation of the CUSUM. Two separate mechanisms for the occurrence of a shift are considered. Methods for evaluating zero-state and steady-state ARL are presented for both 100% inspection and sampling inspection. Parameter choice is also considered, and recommendations made. Comparisons with some np -charts are provided.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patrick D. Bourke (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: