Processing math: 88%
Research article Special Issues

Enhanced fault detection models with real-life applications

  • Received: 23 February 2023 Revised: 09 May 2023 Accepted: 22 May 2023 Published: 12 June 2023
  • MSC : 62P30

  • Nonconforming events are rare in high-quality processes, and the time between events (TBE) may follow a skewed distribution, such as the gamma distribution. This study proposes one- and two-sided triple homogeneously weighted moving average charts for monitoring TBE data modeled by the gamma distribution. These charts are labeled as the THWMA TBE charts. Monte Carlo simulations are performed to approximate the run length distribution of the one- and two-sided THWMA TBE charts. The THWMA TBE charts are compared to competing charts like the DHWMA TBE, HWMA TBE, THWMA TBE, DEWMA TBE, and EWMA TBE charts at a single shift and over a range of shifts. For the single shift comparison, the average run length (ARL) and standard deviation run length (SDRL) measures are used, whereas the extra quadratic loss (EQL), relative average run length (RARL) and performance comparison index (PCI) measures are employed for a range of shifts comparison. The comparison reveals that the THWMA TBE charts outperform the competing charts at a single shift as well as at a certain range of shifts. Finally, two real-life data applications are presented to evaluate the applicability of the THWMA TBE charts in practical situations, one with boring machine failure data and the other with hospital stay time for traumatic brain injury patients.

    Citation: Showkat Ahmad Lone, Zahid Rasheed, Sadia Anwar, Majid Khan, Syed Masroor Anwar, Sana Shahab. Enhanced fault detection models with real-life applications[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19595-19636. doi: 10.3934/math.20231000

    Related Papers:

    [1] Koushik Das, Savin Treanţă, Thongchai Botmart . Set-valued minimax programming problems under σ-arcwisely connectivity. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11238-11258. doi: 10.3934/math.2023569
    [2] Javid Iqbal, Imran Ali, Puneet Kumar Arora, Waseem Ali Mir . Set-valued variational inclusion problem with fuzzy mappings involving XOR-operation. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 3288-3304. doi: 10.3934/math.2021197
    [3] Na Mi, Juhe Sun, Li Wang, Yu Liu . Alternating direction method for the fixed point problem of set-valued mappings with second-order cone double constraints. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 6389-6406. doi: 10.3934/math.2023323
    [4] Adel Lachouri, Naas Adjimi, Mohammad Esmael Samei, Manuel De la Sen . Non-separated inclusion problem via generalized Hilfer and Caputo operators. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 6448-6468. doi: 10.3934/math.2025294
    [5] M. E. Elbrolosy . Semi-(E,F)-convexity in complex programming problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 11119-11131. doi: 10.3934/math.2022621
    [6] Murugesan Manigandan, Kannan Manikandan, Hasanen A. Hammad, Manuel De la Sen . Applying fixed point techniques to solve fractional differential inclusions under new boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 15505-15542. doi: 10.3934/math.2024750
    [7] Yuna Oh, Jun Moon . The infinite-dimensional Pontryagin maximum principle for optimal control problems of fractional evolution equations with endpoint state constraints. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 6109-6144. doi: 10.3934/math.2024299
    [8] Ziran Yin, Chongyang Liu, Xiaoyu Chen, Jihong Zhang, Jinlong Yuan . A comprehensive characterization of the robust isolated calmness of Ky Fan k-norm regularized convex matrix optimization problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 4955-4969. doi: 10.3934/math.2025227
    [9] Morris W. Hirsch . Monotone Dynamical Systems with Polyhedral Order Cones and Dense Periodic Points. AIMS Mathematics, 2017, 2(1): 24-27. doi: 10.3934/Math.2017.1.24
    [10] Nashat Faried, Sahar Mohamed Ali Abou Bakr, H. Abd El-Ghaffar, S. S. Solieman Almassri . Towards coupled coincidence theorems of generalized admissible types of mappings on partial satisfactory cone metric spaces and some applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 8431-8459. doi: 10.3934/math.2023425
  • Nonconforming events are rare in high-quality processes, and the time between events (TBE) may follow a skewed distribution, such as the gamma distribution. This study proposes one- and two-sided triple homogeneously weighted moving average charts for monitoring TBE data modeled by the gamma distribution. These charts are labeled as the THWMA TBE charts. Monte Carlo simulations are performed to approximate the run length distribution of the one- and two-sided THWMA TBE charts. The THWMA TBE charts are compared to competing charts like the DHWMA TBE, HWMA TBE, THWMA TBE, DEWMA TBE, and EWMA TBE charts at a single shift and over a range of shifts. For the single shift comparison, the average run length (ARL) and standard deviation run length (SDRL) measures are used, whereas the extra quadratic loss (EQL), relative average run length (RARL) and performance comparison index (PCI) measures are employed for a range of shifts comparison. The comparison reveals that the THWMA TBE charts outperform the competing charts at a single shift as well as at a certain range of shifts. Finally, two real-life data applications are presented to evaluate the applicability of the THWMA TBE charts in practical situations, one with boring machine failure data and the other with hospital stay time for traumatic brain injury patients.



    Since the last decade researchers have been working in the theory of set-valued optimization problems (in short, SVOPs), a new branch of optimization theory. SVOPs include SVMs as constraints and objective functions. It has applications in viability theory, image processing, mathematical economics and engineering. Borwein [8] proposed the idea of cone convexity of SVMs. It has a significant role to obtain conditions of optimality of SVOPs. Different kinds of differentiability of SVMs have been presented. Jahn and Rauh [23] proposed the idea of contingent epidifferentiation of SVMs. They [6] accordingly proposed the idea of cone preinvexity for SVMs. SVFP is a special class of SVOPs. In the year of 1997, Bhatia and Mehra [6] constituted the Lagrangian theorems of duality for the SVFPs. They [7] additionally formulated the results of duality for Geoffrion solutions of efficiency of the SVFPs under cone convexity supposition. In 2013, Gadhi and Jawhar [22] constituted the necessary conditions of optimality of the SVFPs. Bhatia and Garg [5], Kaul and Lyall [26], Suneja and Lalitha [44] Suneja and Gupta [43], and Lee and Ho [32] constituted the conditions of optimality and studied the theorems of duality for fractional programming using extended convexity. Das and Nahak [10,11,12,13,14,15], Das [9], Das and Treanţă [16,17], Das et al. [18], and Treanţă and Das [46] proposed the idea of σ convex SVMs. They consequently constituted the KKT conditions of sufficiency and derived the results of duality of various kinds of SVOPs under contingent epidifferentiation and σ convexity suppositions.

    In 1976, Avriel [4] proposed the idea of arcwisely connectivity in optimization theory. By substituting a continuous arc for the line segment that connects two points, it essentially generalizes convexity. In 2003, Fu and Wang [21] and Lalitha et al. [31] proposed the idea of arcwisely connected SVMs which is an elongation of of convex SVMs. Lalitha et al. [31] provided the sufficient condition of optimality for SVOPs via contingent epidifferentiation and cone arcwisely connectivity suppositions. Qiu and Yang [35] derived the connectivity of the set of Henig weakly efficiency of SVOPs in 2012. In 2013, Yu [49] provided the sufficient as well as necessary conditions of optimality for global proper efficiency in vector optimization problem (in short, VOP) under arcwisely connected SVMs. In the year of 2016, Yihong and Min [48] proposed the idea of nearly arcwisely connected SVMs of α-order. They additionally provided the sufficient as well as necessary conditions of optimality of SVOPs. Yu [50] provided the sufficient as well as necessary conditions of optimality for global proper efficiency of VOPs involving arcwisely connected SVMs. In 2018, Peng and Xu [34] proposed the idea of cone subarcwisely connected SVMs. They accordingly constituted the necessary conditions of optimality of second-order for local global proper efficient elements of SVOPs.

    Van Su and Hang [47] examined a non-smooth multiobjective fractional programming problem with set, generalized inequality, and equality constraints. For the local weak minimizers, several primary and dual necessary optimality requirements are given in terms of contingent derivatives. An uncertain nonsmooth multiobjective fractional semi-infinite programming problem is established along with certain robust optimality requirements of the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker type in the article by Thuy and Su [45] in the year of 2022. Su and Hang [42] established second-order optimality requirements for a locally Lipschitz multiobjective fractional programming problem with inequality constraints for a second-order strict and weak local Pareto minimum. In this scenario, second-order differentiability is not a requirement at all. But using a contingent epidifferentiation premise, we establish the KKT conditions of sufficiency for the SVFP in this study. Therefore, under the assumption of cone arcwise connection, we give the duals of parametric, Mond-Weir, Wolfe and mixed kinds and prove the accompanying strong, weak, and converse theorems of duality.

    In the study by Agarwal et al. [1] in 2023, fuzzy-valued fractional optimization problems were given KKT optimality requirements. The Dinkelbach algorithm, Lagrange multipliers, and α-cuts were used to build the solution notion. In order to solve the stochastic fuzzy multi-level multi-objective fractional decision making problem (ML-MOFDM), El Sayed et al. [38] introduced a novel modified technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (M-TOPSIS). In the year of 2022, El Sayed et al. [39] used a bi-level multi-objective supply chain model that is interactive (BL-MOSCM). A modified Hungarian method-based algorithm for identifying the best fuzzy AP solution was presented by Elsisy et al. [20]. The solution to the fully intuitionistic fuzzy multi-objective fractional transportation problem was illustrated in the work (FIF-MOFTP) by El Sayed and Abo-Sinna [37] in 2021. In the work by Elsisy et al. [19], a new algorithm for the bi-level multi-objective rough nonlinear programming problem was discussed (BL-MRNPP). For other connected ideas, see [27,28,29,30].

    This paper is structured as follows. We clarify a few terms and introduce some basic ideas in Section 2 of the set-valued optimization theory. In Section 3, we determine the sufficient conditions of optimality for weak efficiency of the SVFPs under extended cone arcwisely connectivity supposition. We additionally formulate the results of duality of parametric (PD), Mond-Weir (MWD), Wolfe (WD), and mixed (MD) kinds in this section.

    Let β be a real normed space (in short, RNS) and Q be a nonvoid subset of β. Then Q is referred to as a cone if ξqQ, for every qQ and ξ0. Furthermore, the cone Q is referred to as pointed if Q(Q)={0β}, solid if int(Q), closed if ¯Q=Q, and convex if

    ξQ+(1ξ)QQ,ξ[0,1],

    where int(Q) and ¯Q represent the interior and closure of Q, respectively and 0β is the zero element of β.

    The positive orthant Rj+ of Rj, specified by

    Rj+={q=(q1,...,qj)Rj:qi0,i=1,...,j},

    is a pointed solid closed convex cone of Rj.

    Let Q be a solid pointed convex cone in β. There are two types of cone-orderings in β w.r.t. Q. For any two elements q1,q2β, we have

    q1q2ifq2q1Q

    and

    q1<q2ifq2q1int(Q).

    The following notions of minimality are mainly used w.r.t. a solid pointed convex cone Q in a RNS β.

    Definition 1. Let ˜β be a nonempty subset of a RNS β. Then ideal minimal, minimal, and weakly minimal points of ˜β are defined as

    (i)q˜β is an ideal minimal point of ˜β if qq, for all q˜β.

    (ii)q˜β is a minimal point of ˜β if there is no q˜β{q}, such that qq.

    (iii)q˜β is a weakly minimal point of ˜β if there is no q˜β, such that q<q.

    The sets of ideal minimal points, minimal points, and weakly minimal points of ˜β are denoted by I-min(˜β), min(˜β), and w-min(˜β) respectively.

    The following theorem characterizes contingent epiderivative of set-valued maps.

    Theorem 1. [36] Let π:α2β be a set-valued map and (p,q)grp(π). Then the contingent epiderivative Δπ(p,q) of π at (p,q) exists if and only if the ideal minimal point of the set

    {qβ:(p,q)η(epigrp(π),(p,q)))}

    exists, for all pΠ, where Π is the projection of η(epigrp(π),(p,q)) onto α. Since Q is a pointed cone, the ideal minimal point of the set

    {qβ:(u,v)η(epigrp(π),(p,q))},

    if it exists, is unique, for all pΠ. In this case, the contingent epiderivative Δπ(p,q) is given by

    Δπ(p,q)(p)=I-min{qβ:(p,q)η(epigrp(π),(p,q))},uΠ.

    Aubin [2,3] proposed the idea of contingent cone in RNSs.

    Definition 2. [2,3] Let N be a nonvoid subset of a RNS β and q¯N. Then, the contingent cone to N at q, denoted by η(N,q), is interpreted as:

    qη(N,q) if there exist sequences {ξn} in R, together with ξn0+ and {qn} in β, together with qnq, satisfying

    q+ξnqnN,nN,

    or, there exist sequences {νn} in R, together with νn>0 and {qn} in N, together with qnq, satisfying

    νn(qnq)q,asn.

    Let α, β be RNSs, 2β be the set of all subsets of β, and Q be a pointed solid convex cone in β. Let π:α2β be a SVM from α to β, i.e., π(p)β, for every pα. The domain, graph, and epigraph of π are interpreted by

    domain(π)={pα:π(p)},
    grp(π)={(p,q)α×β:qπ(p)},

    and

    epigrp(π)={(p,q)α×β:qπ(p)+Q}.

    In 1997, Jahn and Rauh [23] proposed the idea of contingent epidifferentiation of SVMs.

    Definition 3. [23] A function Δπ(p,q):αβ whose epigraph is identical with the contingent cone to the epigraph of π at (p,q), i.e.,

    epigrp(Δπ(p,q))=η(epigrp(π),(p,q)),

    is presumed to be the contingent epidifferentiation of π at (p,q).

    Borwein [8] proposed the idea of cone convexity of SVMs.

    Definition 4. [8] Let M be a nonvoid convex subset of a RNS α. A SVM π:α2β, together with Mdomain(π), is referred to as Q-convex on M if p1,p2M and ξ[0,1],

    ξπ(p1)+(1ξ)π(p2)π(ξp1+(1ξ)p2)+Q.

    Let α be a RNS and M be a nonvoid subset of α. Let π:α2Rj, ω:α2Rj, and ψ:α2Rl be SVMs, together with

    Mdomain(π)domain(ω)domain(ψ).

    Everywhere in the paper, we represent

    0Rj=(0,...,0)Rj

    and

    1Rj=(1,...,1)Rj.

    Let π=(π1,π2,...,πj), ω=(ω1,ω2,...,ωj), and ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψl), where the SVMs πi:α2R, ωi:α2R, i=1,2,...,j, and ψn:α2R, n=1,2,...,l, are interpreted by:

    domain(πi)=domain(π),domain(ωi)=domain(ω)anddomain(ψn)=domain(ψ),
    pM,y=(q1,q2,...,qj)π(p)qiπi(p),i=1,2,...,j,
    r=(r1,r2,...,rj)ω(p)riωi(p),i=1,2,...,j,

    and

    w=(w1,w2,...,wl)ψ(p)wnψn(p),n=1,2,...,l.

    Take into account that πi(p)R+ and ωi(p)int(R+),i=1,2,...,j and pM. Let ξ=(ξ1,ξ2,...,ξj)Rj+. Define qrRj and ξrRj by:

    qr=(q1r1,q2r2,...,qjrj)

    and

    ξr=(ξ1r1,ξ1r2,...,ξjrj).

    For pM, clarify the subset π(p)ω(p) of Rj by:

    π(p)ω(p)={qr=(q1r1,q2r2,...,qjrj):qiπi(p),riωi(p),i=1,2,...,j}.

    We assume the SVFP (FP).

    minimize pMπ(p)ω(p)=(π1(p)ω1(p),π2(p)ω2(p),...,πj(p)ωj(p))s. t., ψ(p)(Rl+). (FP)

    The set of feasibility of (FP) can be categorized as

    S={pM:ψ(p)(Rl+)}.

    Definition 5. A point (p,qr)α×Rj, together with pS, qπ(p), and rω(p), is referred to as to minimize the problem (FP) if there exist no pS, qπ(p), and rω(p) satisfying

    qrqrRj+{0Rj}.

    Definition 6. A point (p,qr)α×Rj, together with pS, qπ(p), and rω(p), is referred to as to minimize weakly the problem (FP) if there exist no pS, qπ(p), and rω(p) satisfying

    qrqrint(Rj+).

    We assume the parametric problem (FPξ) associated with the SVFP (FP).

    minimizepMπ(p)ξω(p)s. t.,ψ(p)(Rl+). (FPξ)

    Definition 7. A point (p,qξr)α×Rj, together with pS, qπ(p), and rω(p), is referred to as to minimize the problem (FPξ), if there exist no pS, qπ(p), and rω(p) satisfying

    (qξr)(qξr)Rj+{ 0 Rj}.

    Definition 8. A point (p,qξr)α×Rj, together with pS, qπ(p), and rω(p), is referred to as to minimize weakly the problem (FPξ), if there exist no pS, qπ(p), and rω(p) satisfying

    (qξr)(qξr)int(Rj+).

    Gadhi and Jawhar [22] demonstrated how the solutions of the problems (FP) and (FPξ) relate to one another.

    Lemma 1. [22] A point (p,qr)α×Rj minimizes weakly the problem (FP) if and only if (p, 0 Rj) minimizes weakly the problem (FPξ), where ξ=qr.

    Avriel [4] proposed the idea of arcwisely connectivity. It is mainly a generalization of convexity.

    Definition 9. A subset M of a RNS α is presumed to be an arcwisely connected set if for every p1,p2M there exists a continuous arc χp1,p2(ξ) defined on [0,1] with a value in M satisfying χp1,p2(0)=p1 and χp1,p2(1)=p2.

    Fu and Wang [21] and Lalitha et al. [31] proposed the idea of arcwisely connected SVMs which is an elongation of the sort of cone convex SVMs.

    Definition 10. [21,31] Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of a RNS α and π:α2β be a SVM, together with Mdomain(π). Then π is presumed to be Q-arcwisely connected on M if

    (1ξ)π(p1)+ξπ(p2)π(χp1,p2(ξ))+Q,p1,p2M and ξ[0,1].

    Peng and Xu [34] proposed the idea of cone subarcwisely connected SVMs.

    Definition 11. [34] Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of a RNS α, eint(Q), and π:α2β be a SVM, together with Mdomain(π). Then π is presumed to be Q-subarcwisely connected on M if

    (1ξ)π(p1)+ξπ(p2)+ϵeπ(χp1,p2(ξ))+Q,p1,p2M,ϵ>0, and ξ[0,1].

    In this section, we present the notion of σ-arcwisely connectivity of SVMs in the broader sense of arcwisely connected SVMs.

    Definition 12. Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of a RNS α, eint(Q), and π:α2β be a SVM, together with Mdomain(π). Then π is presumed to be σ-Q-arcwisely connected w.r.t. e on M if there exists σR, satisfying

    (1ξ)π(p1)+ξπ(p2)π(χp1,p2(ξ))+σξ(1ξ)p1p22e+Q,p1,p2M and ξ[0,1].

    Remark 1. If σ>0, then π is presumed to be strongly σ-Q-arcwisely connected, if σ=0, we get the common concept of Q-arcwisely connectivity, and if σ<0, then π is presumed to be weakly σ-Q-arcwisely connected. Undoubtedly, strongly σ-Q-arcwisely connectivity Q-arcwisely connectivity weakly σ-Q-arcwisely connectivity.

    We create a case study of σ-arcwisely connected SVM, which is not necessarily arcwisely connected.

    Example 1. Let α=R2,β=R,Q=R+ and

    M={p=(p1,p2)|p1+p212,p10,p20}α.

    Define χp,s(ξ)=(1ξ)u+ξs, where p=(p1,p2),s=(s1,s2) and ξ[0,1]. Evidently, M is an arcwisely connected set. For the SVM π:α2β, defined as follows: π(p)=[0,2],p1+p212,p1p2, and π(p)=[3,5] for {p1+p2<12}{p1+p212,p1=p2}, we find that π is not Q-arcwisely connected for p=(1,0),s=(0,1) and ξ=12. However, by taking into account σ=2 and e=[3,3]={3}, we comprehend that π is a σ-Q-arcwisely connected SVM for p=(1,0),s=(0,1).

    In the following theorem, we characterize σ-arcwisely connectivity of SVMs in relation to contingent epidifferentiation.

    Theorem 2. Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of a RNS α, eint(Q), and π:α2β be σ-Q-arcwisely connected w.r.t. e on M. Let pM and qπ(p). Then,

    π(p)qΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+σpp2e+Q,pM,

    where

    χp,p(0+)=limξ0+χp,p(ξ)χp,p(0)ξ,

    presuming that χp,p(0+) appears for every p,pM.

    Proof. Let pM. As π is σ-Q-arcwisely connected w.r.t. e on M,

    (1ξ)π(p)+ξπ(p)π(χp,p(ξ))+σξ(1ξ)pp2e+Q,ξ[0,1].

    Let qπ(p). Choose a sequence {ξn}, together with ξn(0,1), nN, satisfying ξn0+ when n. Suppose

    pn=χp,p(ξn)

    and

    qn=(1ξn)q+ξnqσξn(1ξn)pp2e.

    So,

    qnπ(pn)+Q.

    It is undeniable that

    pn=χp,p(ξn)χp,p(0)=p,qnq, whenever n,
    pnpξn=χp,p(ξn)χp,p(0)ξnχp,p(0+), whenever n,

    and

    qnqξn=qqσ(1ξn)pp2eqqσpp2e, whenever n.

    So,

    (χp,p(0+),qqσpp2e)η(epigrp(π),(p,q))=epigrp(Δπ(p,q)).

    Accordingly,

    qqσpp2eΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+Q,

    that is accurate, for every qπ(p). Hence,

    π(p)qΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+σpp2e+Q,pM.

    Thus, the theorem is implied.

    We determine the sufficient conditions of optimality for the problem (FP) under σ-arcwisely connectivity and contingent epidifferentiation suppositions.

    Theorem 3. (Sufficient conditions of optimality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α, p be an element of the set of feasibility S of (FP), qπ(p), rω(p), ξ=qr, and sψ(p)(Rl+). Take into account that π is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, ξω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M. Let π be contingent epidifferentiable at (p,q), ξω be contingent epidifferentiable at (p,ξr), and ψ be contingent epidifferentiable at (p,s). Presume that there exists (q,r)Rj+×Rl+, together with q00Rj, and

    (σ1+σ2)q,11Rj+σ3r,11Rl0, (3.1)

    satisfying

    q,Δπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM, (3.2)
    qξr=0, (3.3)

    and

    r,s=0. (3.4)

    Then (p,qr) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    Proof. Presume that (p,qr) does not minimize the problem (FP). Then there exist pS, qπ(p) and rω(p) satisfying

    qr<qr.

    As qξr=0, we have

    qr<ξ.

    So,

    qξr<0.

    Hence,

    q,qξr<0,since0RjqRj+.

    Again, as qξr=0, we have

    q,qξr=0.

    Since pS, there exists an element rψ(p)(Rl+).

    Therefore,

    r,r0.

    So,

    r,ss0, as r,s=0.

    Hence,

    q,qξr(qξr)+r,ss<0. (3.5)

    As π is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, ξω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rl, on M,

    π(p)qΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+σ1pp21Rj+Rj+,
    (ξω)(p)+ξrΔ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,p(0+))+σ2pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ψ(p)sΔψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))+σ3pp21Rl+Rl+.

    Hence,

    qqΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+σ1pp21Rj+Rj+,
    ξr+ξrΔ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,p(0+))+σ2pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ssΔψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))+σ3pp21Rl+Rl+.

    So, (3.1) and (3.2) imply that

    q,qξr(qξr)+r,ss0,

    which is in conflict with (3.5). Accordingly, (p,q) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    We can accordingly prove the following theorem by the same approach.

    Theorem 4. (Sufficient conditions of optimality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α, p be an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP), qπ(p), rω(p), and sψ(p)(Rl+). Take into account that rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M. Presume that there exists (q,r)Rj+×Rl+, together with q00Rj, and (3.1) and (3.4) are fulfilled, together with

    q,Δ(rπ)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM. (3.6)

    Then (p,qr) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    We construct the duals of parametric (PD), Mond-Weir (MWD), Wolfe (WD), and mixed (MD) kinds associated with (FP). We consequently explore the related theorems of duality.

    We assume the parametric kind dual (PD) connected with the problem (FP).

    maximize ξ,s. t., q,Δπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM,qiξiri0,i=1,...,j,pM,qπ(p),rω(p),ξπ(p)ω(p),sψ(p),qRj+,rRl+,r,s0andq,1Rj=1. (PD)

    A point (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) meeting all the requirements of the problem (PD) is referred to as feasible to (PD).

    Definition 13. A point (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) in the set of feasibility of the problem (PD) is referred to as a weak maximizer of (PD) if there exists no point (p,q,r,ξ,s,q1,r1) in the set of feasibility of (PD) satisfying

    ξξint(Rj+).

    Theorem 5. (Weak Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α, ¯p be an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP), and (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) be feasible to the problem (PD). Take into account that π is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, ξω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying

    (σ1+σ2)+σ3r,11Rl0. (3.7)

    Then,

    π(¯p)ω(¯p)ξRjint(Rj+).

    Proof. Presume that for some ¯qπ(¯p) and ¯rω(¯p),

    ¯q¯rξint(Rj+).

    So,

    ¯q¯r<ξ.

    Therefore,

    ¯qi¯ri<ξi,i=1,...,j.

    So,

    ¯qiξi¯ri<0,i=1,...,j.

    Therefore,

    q,¯qξ¯r<0,since0RjqRj+.

    From the requirements of (PD),

    qiξiri0,i=1,...,j.

    So,

    q,qξr0.

    As ¯pS, we have

    ψ(¯p)(Rl+).

    We select ¯sψ(¯p)(Rl+).

    So,

    r,¯s0.

    From the requirements of (PD),

    r,s0.

    So,

    r,¯ss=r,¯sr,s0.

    Hence,

    q,¯qξ¯r(qξr)+r,¯ss<0. (3.8)

    As π is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, ξω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rl, on M,

    π(¯p)qΔπ(p,q)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ1¯pp21Rj+Rj+,
    (ξω)(¯p)+ξrΔ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ2¯pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ψ(¯p)sΔψ(p,s)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ3¯pp21Rl+Rl+.

    Hence,

    ¯qqΔπ(p,q)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ1¯pp21Rj+Rj+,
    ξ¯r+ξrΔ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ2¯pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ¯ssΔψ(p,s)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ3¯pp21Rl+Rl+.

    From the requirements of (PD) and (3.7), we have

    q,¯qξ¯r(qξr)+r,¯ss0,

    which is in conflict with (3.8).

    So,

    ¯q¯rξint(Rj+).

    Since ¯qF(¯p) is chosen arbitrarily,

    π(¯p)ω(¯p)ξRjint(Rj+).

    Theorem 6. (Strong Duality) Let (p,qr) minimize weakly the problem (FP) and sψ(p)(Rl+). Take into account that for some (q,r)Rj+×Rl+, together with q,1Rj=1 and ξRj, (3.2)–(3.4) are fulfilled at (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r). Then (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) is feasible to the problem (PD). Furthermore, If the Theorem 5 between (FP) and (PD) remains, then (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) maximizes weakly (PD).

    Proof. As the (3.2)–(3.4) are fulfilled at (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r), we have

    q,Δπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM,
    qξr=0,

    and

    r,s=0.

    So (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) is feasible to (PD). Presume that the Theorem 5 between (FP) and (PD) stays and (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) does not maximize weakly (PD). Then there exists a point (p,q,r,ξ,s,q1,r1) in the set of feasibility of (PD) satisfying

    ξξint(Rj+).

    As qξr=0,

    ξqrint(Rj+).

    which is in conflict with the Theorem 5 between (FP) and (PD). Accordingly, (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) maximizes weakly (PD).

    Theorem 7. (Converse Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α and (p,q,r,ξ,s,q,r) be feasible to (PD), where ξ=qr. Take into account that π is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, ξω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying (3.7). If p is an element of the set of feasibility S of (FP), then (p,qr) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    Proof. Suppose (p,qr) does not minimize the problem (FP). Therefore there exist pS, qπ(p) and rω(p) satisfying

    qr<qr.

    Since ξ=qr,

    qr<ξ.

    So,

    qξr<0.

    Hence,

    q,qξr<0,since0RjqRj+.

    From the requirements of (PD),

    qiξiri0,i=1,...,j.

    Therefore,

    q,qξr0.

    As pS, there exists an element

    rψ(p)(Rl+).

    Therefore,

    r,r0.

    We have

    r,ss0,asr,s=0.

    Hence,

    q,qξr(qξr)+r,ss<0. (3.9)

    As π is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, ξω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rl, on M,

    π(p)qΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+σ1pp21Rj+Rj+,
    (ξω)(p)+ξrΔ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,p(0+))+σ2pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ψ(p)sΔψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))+σ3pp21Rl+Rl+.

    Hence,

    qqΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+σ1pp21Rj+Rj+,
    ξr+ξrΔ(ξω)(p,ξr)(χp,p(0+))+σ2pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ssΔψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))+σ3pp21Rl+Rl+.

    From the requirements of (PD) and (3.7), we have

    q,qξr(qξr)+r,ss0,

    which is in conflict with (3.9). So, (p,qr) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    We assume the Mond-Weir kind dual (MWD) connected with the problem (FP).

    Maximize qr,s. t., q,Δ(rπ)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM,r,s0,pM,qπ(p),rω(p),sψ(p),qRj+,rRl+andq,1Rj=1. (MWD)

    A point (p,q,r,s,q,r) which fulfills all the constraints of (MWD) is referred to as feasible to (MWD).

    Definition 14. A point (p,q,r,s,q,r) in the set of feasibility of the problem (MWD) is referred to as a weak maximizer of (MWD) if there exists no point (p,q,r,s,q1,r1) in the set of feasibility of (MWD) satisfying

    qrqrint(Rj+).

    Theorem 8. (Weak Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α, ¯p be an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP), and (p,q,r,s,q,r) be feasible to the problem (MWD). Take into account that rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying (3.7).

    Then,

    π(¯p)ω(¯p)qrRjint(Rj+).

    Proof. Presume that for some ¯qπ(¯p) and ¯rω(¯p),

    ¯q¯rqrint(Rj+).

    Therefore,

    ¯q¯r<qr.

    So,

    ¯qrq¯r<0.

    Hence,

    q,¯qrq¯r<0,since0RjqRj+.

    As ¯pS, we have

    ψ(¯p)(Rl+).

    We select ¯sψ(¯p)(Rl+).

    So,

    r,¯s0.

    From the requirements of (MWD), we have

    r,s0.

    So,

    r,¯ss=r,¯sr,s0.

    Hence,

    q,¯qrq¯r+r,¯ss<0. (3.10)

    As rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rl, on M,

    rπ(¯p)qrΔπ(p,q)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ1¯pp21Rj+Rj+,
    (qω)(¯p)+qrΔ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ2¯pp21Rj+,Rj+,

    and

    ψ(¯p)sΔψ(p,s)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ3¯pp21Rl+Rl+.

    Hence,

    ¯qrqrΔ(rπ)(p,qr)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ1¯pp21Rj+Rj+,
    r¯r+qrΔ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ2¯pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ¯ssΔψ(p,s)(χp,¯p(0+))+σ3¯pp21Rl+Rl+.

    From the requirements of (MWD) and (3.7),

    q,¯qrq¯r+r,¯ss0,

    which is in conflict with (3.10).

    Therefore,

    ¯q¯rqrint(Rj+).

    Since ¯qF(¯p) is chosen arbitrarily,

    π(¯p)ω(¯p)qrRjint(Rj+).

    Theorem 9. (Strong Duality) Let (p,qr) minimize weakly the problem (FP) and sψ(p)(Rl+). Take into account that for some (q,r)Rj+×Rl+, together with q,1Rj=1, (3.4) and (3.6) are fulfilled at (p,q,r,s,q,r). Then (p,q,r,s,q,r) is feasible to the problem (MWD). Furthermore, If the Theorem 8 between the problems (FP) and (MWD) remains, then (p,q,r,s,q,r) maximizes weakly (MWD).

    Proof. As (3.4) and (3.6) are fulfilled at (p,q,r,s,q,r), we have

    q,Δ(rπ)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM,

    and

    r,s=0.

    So, (p,q,r,s,q,r) is feasible to (MWD). Presume that the Theorem 8 between (FP) and (MWD) stays and (p,q,r,s,q,r) does not maximize weakly (MWD). Then there exists a point (p,q,r,s,q1,r1) in the set of feasibility of (MWD) satisfying

    qr<qr,

    which is in conflict with the Theorem 8 between (FP) and (MWD). Accordingly, (p,q,r,s,q,r) maximizes weakly (MWD).

    Theorem 10. (Converse Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α and (p,q,r,s,q,r) be feasible to the problem (MWD). Take into account that rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying (3.7). If p is an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP), then (p,qr) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    Proof. Suppose (p,qr) does not minimize the problem (FP). Therefore there exist pS, qπ(p) and rω(p) satisfying

    qr<qr.

    So,

    qrqr<0.

    Therefore,

    q,qrqr<0,since0RjqRj+.

    As pS,

    ψ(p)(Rl+).

    We select rψ(p)(Rl+).

    So,

    r,r0.

    From the requirements of (WD),

    r,s0.

    So,

    r,ss=r,rr,s0.

    Hence,

    q,qrqr+r,ss<0. (3.11)

    As rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1Rl, on M,

    rπ(p)qrΔπ(p,q)(χp,p(0+))+σ1pp21Rj+Rj+,
    (qω)(p)+qrΔ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+σ2pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ψ(p)sΔψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))+σ3pp21Rl+Rl+.

    Hence,

    yzqrΔ(rπ)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+σ1pp21Rj+Rj+,
    rz+qrΔ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+σ2pp21Rj+Rj+,

    and

    ssΔψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))+σ3pp21Rl+Rl+.

    So, from the requirements of (WD) and (3.7),

    q,qrqr+r,ss0,

    which is in conflict with (3.11). Therefore (p,qr) minimizes weakly (FP).

    We assume the Wolfe kind dual (WD) connected with the problem (FP).

    Maximize q+r,s1Rjr,s. t., q,Δ(rπ)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM,pM,qπ(p),rω(p),sψ(p),qRj+,rRl+andq,1Rj=1. (WD)

    A point (p,q,r,s,q,r) which fulfills all the constraints of (WD) is referred to as feasible to (WD).

    Definition 15. A point (p,q,r,s,q,r) in the set of feasibility of the problem (WD) is referred to as a weak maximizer of (WD) if there exists no point (p,q,r,s,q1,r1) in the set of feasibility of (WD) satisfying

    q+r1,s11Rjrq+r,s11Rjrint(Rj+).

    Theorem 11. (Weak Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α, ¯p be an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP) and (p,q,r,s,q,r) be feasible to the problem (WD). Take into account that rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying (3.7).

    Then,

    π(¯p)ω(¯p)q+r,s11RjrRjint(Rj+).

    Proof. The proof is comparable to that of Theorems 5 and 8. It is therefore omitted.

    Theorem 12. (Strong Duality) Let (p,qr) minimize weakly the problem (FP) and sψ(p)(Rl+). Take into account that for some (q,r)Rj+×Rl+, together with q,11Rj=1, (3.4) and (3.6) are fulfilled at (p,q,r,s,q,r). Then (p,q,r,s,q,r) is feasible to the problem (WD). Furthermore, If the Theorem 11 between (FP) and (WD) remains, then (p,q,r,s,q,r) maximizes weakly (WD).

    Proof. The proof is comparable to that of Theorems 6 and 9. It is therefore omitted.

    Theorem 13. (Converse Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α, (p,q,r,s,q,r) be feasible to the problem (WD) and r,s0. Take into account that rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying (3.7). If p is an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP), then (p,qr) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    Proof. The proof is comparable to that of Theorems 7 and 10. It is therefore omitted.

    We assume the mixed kind dual (MD) connected with the problem (FP).

    maximize q+r,s1Rjr,s. t., q,Δ(rπ)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+Δ(qω)(p,qr)(χp,p(0+))+r,Δψ(p,s)(χp,p(0+))0,pM,r,s0,pM,qπ(p),rω(p),sψ(p),qRj+,rRl+andq,1Rj=1. (MD)

    A point (p,q,r,s,q,r) meeting all the requirements of the problem (MD) is referred to as feasible to (MD).

    Definition 16. A point (p,q,r,s,q,r) in the set of feasibility of the problem (MD) is referred to as a weak maximizer of (MD) if there exists no point (p,q,r,s,q1,r1) in the set of feasibility of (MD) satisfying

    q+r1,s11Rjrq+r,s11Rjrint(Rj+).

    Theorem 14. (Weak Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α, ¯p be an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP) and (p,q,r,s,q,r) be feasible to the problem (MD). Take into account that rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying (3.7).

    Then,

    π(¯p)ω(¯p)q+r,s11RjrRjint(Rj+).

    Proof. The proof is comparable to that of Theorems 5 and 8. It is therefore omitted.

    Theorem 15. (Strong Duality) Let (p,qr) minimize weakly the problem (FP) and sψ(p)(Rl+). Take into account that for some (q,r)Rj+×Rl+, together with q,11Rj=1, (3.4) and (3.6) are fulfilled at (p,q,r,s,q,r). Then (p,q,r,s,q,r) is feasible to the problem (MD). Furthermore, If the Theorem 14 between (FP) and (MD) remains, then (p,q,r,s,q,r) maximizes weakly (MD).

    Proof. The proof is comparable to that of Theorems 6 and 9. It is therefore omitted.

    Theorem 16. (Converse Duality) Let M be an arcwisely connected subset of α and (p,q,r,s,q,r) be feasible to the problem (MD). Take into account that rπ is σ1-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, qω is σ2-Rj+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rj, and ψ is σ3-Rl+-arcwisely connected w.r.t. 11Rl, on M, satisfying (3.7). If p is an element of the set of feasibility S of the problem (FP), then (p,qr) minimizes weakly the problem \rm (FP).

    Proof. The proof is comparable to that of Theorems 7 and 10. It is therefore omitted.

    To clarify the conclusions, we have included the following example.

    Example 2. Let \alpha = \mathbb{R}^2 and M = \{(t, 0): t \in [-1, 1]\}\subseteq \mathbb{R}^2 . Let p = (p_{1},p_{2})\in \mathbb{R}^2 and p' = (p'_{1},p'_{2})\in \mathbb{R}^2 . Let us consider a continuous arc \chi_{p', p}: [0, 1] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 defined by

    \chi_{p', p}(\xi) = (1-\xi^2)p' + \xi^2 p, \forall \xi \in [0,1].

    Clearly, M is an arcwisely connected subset of \alpha . Now,

    \chi'_{p', p}(0+) = \lim\limits_{\xi \rightarrow 0+}\frac{\chi_{p', p}(\xi)-\chi_{p', p}(0)}{\xi} = (0, 0).

    We consider three set-valued maps \pi:M \subseteq {\mathbb{R}}^{2}\rightarrow 2^{{\mathbb{R}}^{2}} , \omega :M \subseteq {\mathbb{R}}^{2}\rightarrow 2^{{\mathbb{R}}^{2}} , and \psi:M \subseteq \mathbb{R}^2 \rightarrow 2^{{\mathbb{R}}} , with \text{domain}(\pi) = \text{domain}(\omega) = \text{domain}(\psi) = M , defined by

    \pi(t, 0) = \begin{cases} \{(x-10t^2, x^2-10t^2): x \geq0\}, & {if }\; 0\leq t \leq 1,\\ \{(x-10t^2, x-10t^2): x < 0 \}, & {if }\; -1\leq t < 0, \end{cases}
    \omega(t, 0) = (1, 1), \forall t \in [-1, 1],

    and

    \psi(t, 0) = \begin{cases} \{x^2+11t^2: x\geq0\}, & {if }\; 0\leq t \leq 1,\\ \{x+11t^2: x > 0\}, & {if }\; -1\leq t < 0. \end{cases}

    We can show that \pi is (-10) - \mathbb{R}^2_+ -arcwisely connected w.r.t. (1, 1) , -\xi' \omega is 0 - \mathbb{R}^2_+ -arcwisely connected w.r.t. (1, 1) for any \xi'\in \mathbb{R}^2 , and \psi is 11 - \mathbb{R}_+ -arcwisely connected w.r.t. 1 on A . So \sigma_1 = -10 , \sigma_2 = 0 , and \sigma_3 = 11 . Now, we have

    \begin{aligned} \text{epigrp}(\pi)& = \{(u, v) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2: u\in A, v\in \pi (u) + \mathbb{R}^2_+\}\\ & = \{((t, 0), (v_1, v_2)): u = (t, 0), v = (v_1, v_2), t \in [-1, 1], v\in \pi (u) + \mathbb{R}^2_+\}\\ & = \{((t, 0), (v_1, v_2)): 0\leq t \leq 1, v_1 \geq x-10t^2, v_2\geq x^2-10t^2, x\geq 0\}\\ & \cup \{((t, 0), (v_1, v_2)): -1\leq t < 0, v_1 \geq x-10t^2, v_2\geq x-10t^2, x < 0\}. \end{aligned}

    Therefore,

    \begin{aligned} & \eta( \text{epigrp}(\pi), ((t', 0), (v_1', v_2')))\\ & = \begin{cases} \mathbb{R}_+\times \{0\} \times \mathbb{R}_+\times\mathbb{R}_+, & {if }\; t' = 0, v_1' = v_2' = 0,\\ \mathbb{R}\times \{0\} \times \mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}, & {otherwise}. \end{cases} \end{aligned}

    It is obvious that \text{I-min} \{(v_1, v_2): ((t, 0), (v_1, v_2))\in \eta( \text{epigrp}(\pi), ((t', 0), (v_1', v_2')))\} exists for 0\leq t \leq 1 if and only if t' = 0, v_1' = 0, and v_2' = 0 . Clearly,

    \text{I-min} \{(v_1, v_2): ((t, 0), (v_1, v_2))\in \eta( \text{epigrp}(\pi), ((0, 0), (0, 0)))\} = \{(0, 0)\}, \; for\; 0\leq t \leq 1.

    Now, we have

    \overrightarrow{\Delta} \pi ((0, 0), (0, 0)) (t, 0) = \text{I-min} \{(v_1, v_2): ((t, 0), (v_1, v_2))\in \eta( \text{epigrp}(\pi), ((0, 0), (0, 0)))\}.

    So, \pi is contingent epidifferentiable only at ((0, 0), (0, 0)) with

    \overrightarrow{\Delta} \pi ((0, 0), (0, 0)) (t, 0) = \{(0, 0)\}, \forall t, \;\text{ with }\; 0\leq t \leq 1.

    Similarly, we can show that \omega is contingent epidifferentiable everywhere on M and \psi is contingent epidifferentiable only at ((0, 0), 0) with

    \overrightarrow{\Delta} \psi ((0, 0), 0) (t, 0) = \{0\}, \forall t, \;\text{ with }\; 0\leq t \leq 1.

    Let p' = (0, 0) , q' = (0, 0)\in \pi(p') , r' = (1, 1) \in \omega(p') , and s' = 0 \in \psi(p')\cap (-\mathbb{R}_+) . So, \xi' = \frac{q'}{r'} = (0, 0) . The feasible set of the problem (FP) is S = \{(t, 0) : \psi(t, 0) \cap (-\mathbb{R}_+)\neq \emptyset\} = \{(0, 0)\} . Therefore, (p', \frac{q'}{r'}) = ((0, 0), (0, 0)) minimizes weakly the problem (FP).

    Now, we have

    \overrightarrow{\Delta}\pi(p', q')(\chi'_{p', p}(0+)) = \overrightarrow{\Delta}\pi(p', q')(0, 0) = (0, 0),
    \overrightarrow{\Delta}(-\xi'\omega) (p', -\xi' r')(\chi'_{p', p}(0+)) = \overrightarrow{\Delta}(-\xi'\omega) (p', -\xi' r')(0, 0) = (0, 0),

    and

    \overrightarrow{\Delta}\psi(p', s')(\chi'_{p', p}(0+)) = \overrightarrow{\Delta}\psi(p', s')(0, 0) = 0.

    It is clear that for q^* = (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2}) and r^* = 1 , the sufficient optimality conditions (3.1)–(3.4) are satisfied and \langle q^*, (1, 1)\rangle = 1 . So (p', q', r', s', q^*, r^*) is feasible to the (MWD). Again, (\sigma_{1}+ \sigma_2) \langle q^*, (1, 1)\rangle +\sigma_{3} \langle r^*, 1\rangle = 1 \geq 0. Hence the weak duality Theorem 7 holds between (FP) and (MWD). We prove that (p', q', r', s', q^*, r^*) maximizes weakly (MWD). Let any point feasible to the Mond-Weir type dual (MWD) be (p, q, r, s, q^*_1, r^*_1) where p\in M, q\in \pi(p), r\in \psi(p), s \in \psi(p)\cap (-\mathbb{R}_+), q^*_1\in \mathbb{R}^2_+, r^*_1\in \mathbb{R}_+, \;\text{ and }\; \langle q^*_1, (1, 1) \rangle = 1 . Since \pi and \psi are contingent epidifferentiable only at ((0, 0), (0, 0)) and the conditions of the Mond-Weir type dual (MWD) are satisfied at the point (p, q, r, s, q^*_1, r^*_1) , we have p = (0, 0) , q = (0, 0) , r = (1, 1) , and s = 0 . Hence (p', q', r', s', q^*, r^*) , with p' = (0, 0) , q' = (0, 0) , r' = (1, 1) , and s' = 0 , maximizes weakly the problem (MWD). Hence Theorem 8 is satisfied. Similarly, we can verify the weak, strong, and converse duality results for parametric (PD), Wolfe (WD), and mixed (MD) kinds for the problem (FP).

    In this paper, we determine the KKT conditions of sufficiency for the SVFP \rm (FP) via contingent epidifferentiation supposition. We accordingly present the duals of parametric \rm (PD), Mond-Weir \rm (MWD), Wolfe \rm (WD), and mixed \rm (MD) kinds and derive the associated strong, weak, and converse theorems of duality under cone arcwisely connectivity supposition.

    The authors declare no conflict of interest.



    [1] W. A. Shewhart, Economic control of quality of manufactured product, New York: D. Van Nostrand Company, 1931.
    [2] V. Alevizakos, C. Koukouvinos, A. Lappa, Monitoring of time between events with a double generally weighted moving average control chart, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 35 (2019), 685–710. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2430 doi: 10.1002/qre.2430
    [3] M. Aslam, M. Khan, S. M. Anwar, B. Zaman, A homogeneously weighted moving average control chart for monitoring time between events, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 38 (2022), 1013–1044. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.3032 doi: 10.1002/qre.3032
    [4] J. M. Lucas. Counted data CUSUM's, Technometrics, 27 (1985), 129–144.
    [5] S. Vardeman, D. Ray, Average run lengths for CUSUM schemes when observations are exponentially distributed, Technometrics, 27 (1985), 145–150.
    [6] F. F. Gan, Designs of one- and two-sided exponential EWMA charts, J. Qual. Technol., 30 (1998), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224065.1998.11979819 doi: 10.1080/00224065.1998.11979819
    [7] L. Y. Chan, M. Xie, T. N. Goh, Cumulative quantity control charts for monitoring production processes, Int. J. Prod. Res., 38 (2000), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/002075400189482 doi: 10.1080/002075400189482
    [8] M Xie, T. N. Goh, P. Ranjan, Some effective control chart procedures for reliability monitoring, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe., 77 (2002), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(02)00041-8 doi: 10.1016/S0951-8320(02)00041-8
    [9] C. Pehlivan, M. C. Testik, Impact of model misspecification on the exponential EWMA charts: a robustness study when the time-between-events are not exponential, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 26 (2010), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.1033 doi: 10.1002/qre.1033
    [10] N. Chakraborty, S. W. Human, N. Balakrishnan, A generally weighted moving average chart for time between events, Commun. Stat.-Simul. Comput., 46 (2017), 7790–7817. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2016.1252397 doi: 10.1080/03610918.2016.1252397
    [11] V. Alevizakos, C. Koukouvinos, A double exponentially weighted moving average chart for time between events., Commun. Stat.-Simul. Comput., 49 (2000), 2765–2784. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2018.1532516 doi: 10.1080/03610918.2018.1532516
    [12] V. Alevizakos, K. Chatterjee, C. Koukouvinos, A triple exponentially weighted moving average control chart for monitoring time between events, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 37 (2021), 1059–1079. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2781 doi: 10.1002/qre.2781
    [13] S. W. Roberts, Control chart tests based on geometric moving averages, Technometrics, 42 (2000), 97–101.
    [14] J. S. Hunter, The exponentially weighted moving average, J. Qual. Technol., 18 (1986), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224065.1986.11979014 doi: 10.1080/00224065.1986.11979014
    [15] N. Abbas, Homogeneously weighted moving average control chart with an application in substrate manufacturing process, Comput. Ind. Eng., 120 (2018), 460–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.05.009 doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2018.05.009
    [16] M. Abid, A. Shabbir, H. Z. Nazir, R. A. K. Sherwani, M. Riaz, A double homogeneously weighted moving average control chart for monitoring of the process mean, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 36 (2020), 1513–1527.
    [17] M. Riaz, Z. Abbas, H. Z. Nazir, M. Abid, On the development of triple homogeneously weighted moving average control chart, Symmetry, 13 (2021), 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13020360 doi: 10.3390/sym13020360
    [18] Z. Rasheed, H. Y. Zhang, S. M. Anwar, B. Zaman, Homogeneously mixed memory charts with application in the substrate production process, Math. Prob. Eng., 2021 (2021), 2582210. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/2582210 doi: 10.1155/2021/2582210
    [19] Z. Rasheed, H. Y. Zhang, M. Arslan, B. Zaman, S. M. Anwar, M. Abid, et al., An efficient robust nonparametric triple EWMA Wilcoxon signed-rank control chart for process location, Math. Probl. Eng., 2021 (2021), 2570198. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/2570198 doi: 10.1155/2021/2570198
    [20] Z. Rasheed, M. Khan, N. L. Abiodun, S. M. Anwar, G. Khalaf, S. A. Abbasi, Improved nonparametric control chart based on ranked set sampling with application of chemical data modelling, Math. Probl. Eng., 2022 (2022), 7350204. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7350204 doi: 10.1155/2022/7350204
    [21] V. Alevizakos, C. Koukouvinos, A progressive mean control chart for monitoring time between events, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 36 (2020), 161–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2565 doi: 10.1002/qre.2565
    [22] V. Alevizakos, C. Koukouvinos, Monitoring reliability for a gamma distribution with a double progressive mean control chart, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 37 (2021), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2730 doi: 10.1002/qre.2730
    [23] D. C. Montgomery, Introduction to Statistical Quality Control, Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
    [24] M. Awais, A. Haq, A new cumulative sum control chart for monitoring the process mean using varied L ranked set sampling, J. Ind. Prod. Eng., 35 (2018), 74–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2017.1417787 doi: 10.1080/21681015.2017.1417787
    [25] Z. Wu, J. X. Jiao, M. Yang, Y. Liu, Z. J. Wang, An enhanced adaptive Cusum control chart, ⅡE Trans., 41 (2009), 642–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/07408170802712582 doi: 10.1080/07408170802712582
    [26] M. Khan, M. Aslam, S. M. Anwar, B. Zaman, A robust hybrid exponentially weighted moving average chart for monitoring time between events, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 38 (2022), 895–923. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.3021 doi: 10.1002/qre.3021
    [27] Y. J. Ou, Z. Wu, F. Tsung, A comparison study of effectiveness and robustness of control charts for monitoring process mean, Int. J. Prod. Econ., 135 (2012), 479–490.
    [28] P. N. Rao, Manufacturing Technology: Metal Cutting and Machine Tools, McGraw-Hill Education (India) Pvt Limited, 2000.
    [29] M. P. Hossain, M. H. Omar, M. Riaz, New V control chart for the Maxwell distribution, J. Stat. Comput. Sim., 87 (2016), 594–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2016.1222391 doi: 10.1080/00949655.2016.1222391
    [30] M. P. Hossain, R. A. Sanusi, M. H. Omar, M. Riaz, On designing Maxwell CUSUM control chart: an efficient way to monitor failure rates in boring processes, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 100 (2019), 1923–1930.
    [31] R. H. Bonow, J. Barber, N. R. Temkin, W. Videtta, C. Rondina, G. Petroni, et al., The outcome of severe traumatic brain injury in Latin America, World Neurosurg., 111 (2018), e82–e90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.11.171 doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.11.171
    [32] P. W. Owens, N. P. Lynch, D. P. O'Leary, A. J. Lowery, M. J. Kerin, Six-year review of traumatic brain injury in a regional trauma unit: demographics, contributing factors and service provision in Ireland, Brain Injury, 32 (2018), 900–906. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2018.1466366 doi: 10.1080/02699052.2018.1466366
    [33] P. L. Ramos, D. C. Nascimento, P. H. Ferreira, K. T. Weber, T. E. G. Santos, F. Louzada, Modeling traumatic brain injury lifetime data: Improved estimators for the generalized Gamma distribution under small samples, Plos One, 14 (2019), e0221332.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Koushik Das, Chandal Nahak, Sufficiency and duality for set-valued optimization problems with \kappa-cone arcwise connectedness of higher-order, 2025, 0030-3887, 10.1007/s12597-025-00922-0
    2. Bhuwan Chandra Joshi, Murari Kumar Roy, Savin Treanţă, Cristina-Mihaela Cebuc, On some nonsmooth equilibrium constrained minimization models using epiderivative, 2025, 59, 0399-0559, 1665, 10.1051/ro/2025062
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1976) PDF downloads(52) Cited by(5)

Figures and Tables

Figures(9)  /  Tables(8)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog