
This paper is concerned with a delay-independent output-feedback controller synthesis suppressing the L∞-gain of linear time-delay systems with time-varying delays. We first proposed a continuous-time version of the existing discrete-time ellipsoidal D-invariant set and established its existence condition in terms of some linear matrix inequalities (LMIs). This existence condition was further extended to characterizing the L∞-gain of linear time-delay systems with time-varying delays. Because of the delay-independent property of the proposed D-invariant set, the L∞-gain analysis does not depend on the choice of delays including their magnitudes and time derivatives. Based on this analysis method, we also constructed an output-feedback controller synthesis for ensuring the L∞-gain of time-delay systems bounded by a performance level ρ. In an equivalent fashion to the L∞-gain analysis method, this controller synthesis is independent of the delays in the sense that the obtained controller coefficients do not depend on the delay characteristics. Finally, numerical results were given to demonstrate the effectiveness and validity of the proposed results.
Citation: Hyung Tae Choi, Jung Hoon Kim. An L∞ performance control for time-delay systems with time-varying delays: delay-independent approach via ellipsoidal D-invariance[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30384-30405. doi: 10.3934/math.20241466
[1] | I. A. Husseiny, M. Nagy, A. H. Mansi, M. A. Alawady . Some Tsallis entropy measures in concomitants of generalized order statistics under iterated FGM bivariate distribution. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 23268-23290. doi: 10.3934/math.20241131 |
[2] | Mansour Shrahili, Mohamed Kayid, Mhamed Mesfioui . Stochastic inequalities involving past extropy of order statistics and past extropy of record values. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 5827-5849. doi: 10.3934/math.2024283 |
[3] | Mohamed Said Mohamed, Haroon M. Barakat, Aned Al Mutairi, Manahil SidAhmed Mustafa . Further properties of Tsallis extropy and some of its related measures. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 28219-28245. doi: 10.3934/math.20231445 |
[4] | Mansour Shrahili . Some new results involving residual Renyi's information measure for k-record values. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 13313-13335. doi: 10.3934/math.2024649 |
[5] | Ramy Abdelhamid Aldallal, Haroon M. Barakat, Mohamed Said Mohamed . Exploring weighted Tsallis extropy: Insights and applications to human health. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(2): 2191-2222. doi: 10.3934/math.2025102 |
[6] | Alaa M. Abd El-Latif, Hanan H. Sakr, Mohamed Said Mohamed . Fractional generalized cumulative residual entropy: properties, testing uniformity, and applications to Euro Area daily smoker data. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18064-18082. doi: 10.3934/math.2024881 |
[7] | Refah Alotaibi, Mazen Nassar, Zareen A. Khan, Wejdan Ali Alajlan, Ahmed Elshahhat . Entropy evaluation in inverse Weibull unified hybrid censored data with application to mechanical components and head-neck cancer patients. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(1): 1085-1115. doi: 10.3934/math.2025052 |
[8] | Abdullah Ali H. Ahmadini, Amal S. Hassan, Ahmed N. Zaky, Shokrya S. Alshqaq . Bayesian inference of dynamic cumulative residual entropy from Pareto Ⅱ distribution with application to COVID-19. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(3): 2196-2216. doi: 10.3934/math.2021133 |
[9] | Abdulhakim A. Al-Babtain, Amal S. Hassan, Ahmed N. Zaky, Ibrahim Elbatal, Mohammed Elgarhy . Dynamic cumulative residual Rényi entropy for Lomax distribution: Bayesian and non-Bayesian methods. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 3889-3914. doi: 10.3934/math.2021231 |
[10] | Baria A. Helmy, Amal S. Hassan, Ahmed K. El-Kholy, Rashad A. R. Bantan, Mohammed Elgarhy . Analysis of information measures using generalized type-Ⅰ hybrid censored data. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20283-20304. doi: 10.3934/math.20231034 |
This paper is concerned with a delay-independent output-feedback controller synthesis suppressing the L∞-gain of linear time-delay systems with time-varying delays. We first proposed a continuous-time version of the existing discrete-time ellipsoidal D-invariant set and established its existence condition in terms of some linear matrix inequalities (LMIs). This existence condition was further extended to characterizing the L∞-gain of linear time-delay systems with time-varying delays. Because of the delay-independent property of the proposed D-invariant set, the L∞-gain analysis does not depend on the choice of delays including their magnitudes and time derivatives. Based on this analysis method, we also constructed an output-feedback controller synthesis for ensuring the L∞-gain of time-delay systems bounded by a performance level ρ. In an equivalent fashion to the L∞-gain analysis method, this controller synthesis is independent of the delays in the sense that the obtained controller coefficients do not depend on the delay characteristics. Finally, numerical results were given to demonstrate the effectiveness and validity of the proposed results.
Information theory is a rich and wide-ranging field that has laid the foundation for new mathematical questions and advances in mathematical techniques. Various information measures seem useful for deriving insightful results in many areas of mathematics. In the literature, the quantification of uncertainty that exists in random phenomena is largely enabled by the information theory. The extensive range of its applications is expounded upon in Shannon's seminal work [23]. When a non-negative random variable (rv) X, representing the lifetime of a system, or a unit or living organism, is given for a continuous cumulative distribution function (cdf) F(x) and a probability density function (pdf) f(x), as stated in [28], the Tsallis entropy of order α becomes a pertinent metric which is defined as follows:
Hα(X)=11−α[∫∞0fα(x)dx−1],=11−α[E(fα−1(F−1(U)))−1], | (1.1) |
in which α>0, α≠1, E(⋅) signifies the expectation, F−1(u)=inf{x;F(x)≥u}, for u∈[0,1], amounts to the quantile function, and U is uniformly distributed on [0,1]. It is worth pointing out that the Tsallis entropy is a nondecreasing function of the Renyi one given by: Rα(X)=1/(1−α)log(1+(1−α)Hα(X)), where Rα(X) is the Renyi entropy of order α, (see [16]). The Tsallis entropy can generally take negative values, but by selecting the right values for α, it can be nonnegative. One crucial finding is that H(X)=limα→1Hα(X), demonstrating how Tsallis entropy and Shannon differential entropy converge. The Tsallis entropy shows nonadditivity in contrast to the additivity of the Shannon entropy. Specifically, under the Shannon framework, H(X,Y)=H(X)+H(Y) holds for two independent random variables X and Y. By contrast, the Tsallis framework yields Hα(X,Y)=Hα(X)+Hα(Y)+(1−α)Hα(X)Hα(Y). Because it is not additive like the Shannon entropy, the Tsallis entropy is more versatile and can be applied to a wide range of subjects such as information theory, physics, chemistry, and technology; see, e.g., [18]. It is worth noting that the Tsallis entropy finds extensive applications in parameter estimation problems, including areas like seismic imaging and natural information. This demonstrates the significant utility of Tsallis entropy as an effective tool for addressing complexity and nonadditivity challenges encountered in parameter estimation across diverse fields.
Assuming that the lifetime of a recently introduced system is denoted by the rv X, the Tsallis entropy Hα(X) function is a measure of the system's intrinsic uncertainty. However, there exist scenarios in which the actors are aware of the system's age. For example, let us assume that one knows that the system is operational at time t and wishes to assess future uncertainty, that is, the uncertainty in the rv Xt=X−t∣X>t ([9]). In these circumstances, the traditional Tsallis entropy Hα(X) is no longer able to offer the desired insight. Consequently, a new measure known as the residual Tsallis entropy (RTE) is implemented, defined as follows:
Hα(X;t)=11−α[∫∞0fαt(x)dx−1]=11−α[∫∞t(f(x)S(t))αdx−1], | (1.2) |
where
ft(x)=f(x+t)S(t), x,t>0, |
is the pdf of Xt and S(t)=P(X>t) is the survival function (sf) of X. Numerous studies have been conducted in the literature to investigate different facets of Tsallis entropy, which can be seen in [2,5,6,15,17,31].
Engineers widely acknowledge that highly uncertain components or systems possess inherent unreliability. However, they often face challenges in quantifying this uncertainty. For instance, during the system design phase, engineers typically rely on available information about deterioration, part wear, and other relevant factors to generate hazard rate functions or mean residual lifetime functions. These functions offer insights into the expected behavior of the system based on the provided information (see [11] for more details). So, the purpose of this paper is to investigate RTE of order statistics which measures the concentration of conditional probabilities. The results include expressions, bounds, and monotonicity properties of RTE of order statistics.
We take a random sample of size n from a distribution F represented by the sample X1,X2,…,Xn. The ordered values of the sample are called order statistics of the sample, which are denoted by: X1:n≤X2:n≤…≤Xn:n. Since they can be used to explain probability distributions, evaluate how well a dataset fits a particular model, regulate the quality of a process or product, assess the reliability of a system or component, and for a variety of other purposes, these statistics are crucial for many different fields.
Numerous applications of order statistics include robust estimation, outlier detection, and probability distribution characterization [4]. The information qualities of order statistics have been studied by a number of writers. It was demonstrated by [29] that there is a constant difference between the parent random variable and the average entropy of order statistics. For order statistics, [19] derived a few recurrence relations. Using order statistics, [12] investigated Kullback-Leibler information measure and Shannon entropy. Renyi entropy is known to not uniquely determine the underlying distribution function. [7] used order statistics to study Renyi entropy and demonstrated that, for certain values of n, this measure characterizes the distribution function. Using the Renyi entropy of ith order statistics, Abbasnejad and [1] examined a few stochastic comparisons and talked about some bounds for this measure. For ith order statistics, [30] proposed the residual Renyi entropy. They have derived certain bounds for the residual Renyi entropy of order statistics and record values, and they have simplified the definition of the residual Renyi entropy of the ith order statistics. [25] studied the residual extropy as a measure of uncertainty of order statistics. [26] considered some aspects of past Tsallis entropy of order statistics.
Furthermore, they play a crucial role in reliability theory, particularly in the analysis of coherent systems and lifespan testing of data acquired through different censorship techniques. Several scholars have made good use of the information properties of ordered variables; these findings are reported in [13,19,29], as well as their references. Properties of Renyi entropy of excess amounts of ordered variables and record values were examined by [30]; also see [8]. By examining elements of residual Tsallis entropy in terms of ordered variables, our study seeks to advance the field. [3] has investigated the characteristics of a coherent and mixed system's Tsallis entropy in more recent times.
The outline of the rest of the paper is as follows: The RTE form for order statistics, Xi:n, is shown in Section 2. It is based on a sample taken from any arbitrary continuous distribution function F. We translate these RTE into terms of RTE for order statistics derived from a unit-distributed sample. We derive upper and lower bounds to approximate the RTE, since closed-form equations for the RTE of order statistics are frequently unavailable for many statistical models. To illustrate these bounds' applicability and practicality, we offer multiple illustrative instances. Furthermore, we examine the monotonicity characteristics of RTE for a sample's extremum in mild circumstances. As the sample size grows, we observe that the RTEs at the extremum of a random sample follow a monotonic pattern. We refute this observation, however, with a counterexample showing that RTE for other order statistics Xi:n is non-monotonic concerning sample size. We investigate the RTE of order statistics Xi:n concerning the index of order statistics to further explore the monotonic behavior i. Our findings demonstrate that over the whole support of F, the RTE of Xi:n is not a monotonic function of i.
In Section 4, we conclude by presenting some computational results that validate some of the conclusions drawn from this paper. We also offer estimators for calculating the exponential distribution's RTE. For this reason, the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) is derived. Section 4 concludes the article with some open problems for the future.
Let us assume random lifetimes X and Y with probability density functions (pdfs) f and g, and survival functions SX and SY, respectively. We recall that X is less than Y in the usual stochastic order, denoted by X≤stY, if SX(x)≤SY(x) for all x>0, and X is less than Y in the likelihood ratio order, denoted by X≤lrY if g(x)/f(x) is increasing in x>0.
The RTE of order statistics dependent on the RTE of ordered uniformly distributed variables is thus expressed here. Considering i=1,…,n, the pdf and sf of Xi:n are denoted by fi:n(x) and Si:n(x), respectively. It can be written that
fi:n(x)=1B(i,n−i+1)(F(x))i−1(S(x))n−if(x), x>0, | (2.1) |
Si:n(x)=i−1∑k=0(nk)(1−S(x))k(S(x))n−k, x>0, | (2.2) |
where
B(a,b)=∫10xa−1(1−x)b−1dx, a>0,b>0, |
is known as the complete beta function; see, e.g., [10]. Furthermore, we can express the survival function Si:n(x) as follows:
Si:n(x)=ˉBF(x)(i,n−i+1)B(i,n−i+1), | (2.3) |
where
ˉBx(a,b)=∫1xua−1(1−u)b−1du, 0<x<1, |
is known as the incomplete beta functions. In this section, we shortly write Y∼ˉBt(a,b) to denote that the random variable Y follows the pdf:
fY(y)=1ˉBt(a,b)ya−1(1−y)b−1, t≤y≤1. | (2.4) |
The study of Xi:n's residual Tsallis entropy, which is based on the conditional rv [Xi:n−t|Xi:n>t], is the focus of this paper. It measures the degree of uncertainty regarding the predictability of the system's residual lifespan. When i=1,2,…,n, the (n−i+1)-out-of-n systems are important structures in the field of reliability engineering. An (n−i+1)-out-of-n system functions in this scenario if, and only if, at least (n−i+1) components are active. We consider a system consisting of identical components that are dispersed independently; these components' lifetimes are represented by the notation X1,X2,…,Xn. The random lifetime of the system is equal to Xi:n, where i denotes the ordered variable's position. When i=1, a parallel system is shown, and a serial system is indicated by i=n. The RTE of Xi:n functions as a measure of entropy related to the system's residual lifetime in the context of (n−i+1)-out-of-n systems running at time t. System designers can learn important information about the entropy of (n−i+1)-out-of-n structures connected to systems that are operating at a specific time t from this dynamic entropy metric.
The following lemma establishes a connection between the incomplete beta function and the RTE of ordered variables from a uniform distribution, thus improving computational efficiency. From a practical perspective, this link is essential since it makes the computation of RTE easier. Since it only requires a few simple calculations, the proof of this lemma—which is obtained by the definition of the RTE—is not included here.
Lemma 2.1. Let Ui:n be the ith ordered value of a random sample with uniformly distributed units on (0, 1). Then,
Hα(Ui:n;t)=11−α[ˉBt(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1)ˉBαt(i,n−i+1)−1], 0<t<1, |
for all α>0, α≠1.
Proof. The pdf and survival function of Ui:n are represented by
gi:n(u)=1B(i,n−i+1)ui−1(1−u)n−i, | (2.5) |
SUi:n(x)=ˉBu(i,n−i+1)B(i,n−i+1), | (2.6) |
for all 0<u<1. From (1.2), (2.5), and (2.6), one gets
Hα(Ui:n;t)=11−α[∫1t(gi:n(u)SUi:n(t))αdu−1]=11−α[∫1t(ui−1(1−u)n−i(x)ˉBt(i,n−i+1))αdu−1]=11−α[1ˉBαt(i,n−i+1)∫1tuα(i−1)(1−u)α(n−i)du−1]=11−α[ˉBt(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1)ˉBαt(i,n−i+1)−1]. |
Hence, the theorem is proved.
This lemma makes use of the well-known incomplete beta function to make it simple for scholars and practitioners to compute the RTE of order statistics from a uniform distribution. The application and usability of RTE are enhanced in a variety of scenarios by this computational simplification. In Figure 1, the plot of Hα(Ui:n;t) is depicted for different values of α and i=1,2,⋯,5 when the total number of observations is n=5. It is expected from the figure that there is no inherent monotonicity between the order statistics. However, in the following Lemma 2.3, we establish conditions under which a monotonic relationship can be established between the index i and the number of components. This lemma will provide valuable insight into the arrangement of the system components and the resulting effect on the reliability of the system.
The utilization of the probability integral transformation Ui:nd=F(Xi:n), i=1,2,⋯,n, where d= means equality in distribution and F is a continuous distribution function, is widely recognized in the literature. It is a well-established fact that this transformation yields a beta distribution with parameters i and n−i+1. This fundamental property plays a pivotal role in the achievement of our results. Using this, the upcoming theorem establishes a relationship between the RTE of order statistics Xi:n and the RTE of order statistics from a uniform distribution.
Theorem 2.1. For all α>0, α≠1, we have:
Hα(Xi:n;t)=11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)E[fα−1(F−1(Yi))]−1], t>0, | (2.7) |
where Yi∼ˉBF(t)(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1).
Proof. By making the change of variable as u=F(x), from (1.2), (2.1), and (2.3), one gets
Hα(Xi:n;t)=11−α[∫∞t(fi:n(x)Si:n(t))αdx−1]=11−α[∫∞t(Fi−1(x)Sn−i(x)f(x)ˉBF(t)(i,n−i+1))αdx−1]=11−α[ˉBF(t)(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1)ˉBαF(t)(i,n−i+1)∫∞tFα(i−1)(x)Sα(n−i)(x)fα(x)ˉBF(t)(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1)dx−1]=11−α[ˉBF(t)(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1)ˉBαF(t)(i,n−i+1)∫1F(t)uα(i−1)(1−u)α(n−i)fα−1(F−1(u))ˉBF(t)(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1)du−1]=11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)E[fα−1(F−1(Yi))]−1], t>0. | (2.8) |
The last equality is obtained from Lemma 2.1, and this completes the proof.
It is worth pointing out that Eq (2.7) demonstrates how the RTE of [Xi:n−t|Xi:n>t] can be expressed as the product of two distinct terms, both of which are dependent on time t. However, the first term is influenced by the RTE of order statistics from a uniform distribution, while the second term is dependent on the distribution of the component lifetimes. By explicitly acknowledging this decomposition, we provide a deeper understanding of the factors influencing entropy and shed light on the role of the RTE and component lifetimes in the analysis. After some calculation, it can be seen that when in (2.7) the order α goes to unity, the Shannon entropy of the ith order statistic from a sample of F can be written as follows:
H(Xi:n;t)=H(Ui:n;F(t))−E[logf(F−1(Yi))], | (2.9) |
where Yi∼ˉBF(t)(i,n−i+1). The particular case where t=0, has already been derived by [13]. It is clear that Eq (2.9) demonstrates how the residual entropy of [Xi:n−t|Xi:n>t] can be expressed as the differences of two distinct terms, both of which are dependent on time t. The first term is the residual entropy of order statistics consisting of (independent and identically distributed) i.i.d. random variables of uniform distribution on [0,1] while the second term depends on the truncated beta distribution.
Even if we have been able to construct a closed equation for the RTE of the initially ordered variable in the exponential case, considering the higher order statistics in some other distributions makes the process much more challenging. Regretfully, there are typically no closed-form equations available for the RTE of higher-order statistics in these distributions or in many other distributions. We are encouraged to investigate different methods for characterizing the RTE of order statistics in light of this constraint. In light of this, we offer the following theorem as a convincing demonstration that sheds light on the characteristics of these constraints and their use in real-world situations.
Theorem 2.2. Let X and Xi:n have RTEs Hα(X;t) and Hα(Xi:n;t), respectively.
(a) Let Mi=fYi(mi) where mi=max{F(t),i−1n−1} is the mode of the distribution of Yi, then for α>1, we have
Hα(Xi:n;t)≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)((1−α)Hα(X;t)+1)MiSα(t)−1], |
and for 0<α<1, we have
Hα(Xi:n;t)≤11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)((1−α)Hα(X;t)+1)MiSα(t)−1]. |
(b) Suppose that we have M=f(m)<∞, thus m is the mode of f and f(x)≤M. Then, for any α>0, we obtain
Hα(Xi:n;t)≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)Mα−1−1]. |
Proof. (a) By applying Theorem 2.3, we only need to establish a bound for E[fα−1(F−1(Yi))]. To do this, for α>1 one has
E[fα−1(F−1(Yi))]=∫1F(t)uα(i−1)(1−u)α(n−i)ˉBF(t)(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1)fα−1(F−1(u))du≥Mi∫1F(t)fα−1(F−1(u))du=Mi∫∞tfα(x)dx=Mi[(1−α)Hα(X;t)+1]Sα(t). |
The result now is easily obtained by recalling (2.7). The proof for 0<α<1 is easily obtained by reversing the inequality.
(b) Since for α>1 it holds that
fα−1(F−1(u))≤Mα−1, |
one can write
E[fα−1(F−1(Yi))]Mα−1. |
The result now is easily obtained from relation (2.7) and this completes the proof. By reversing the inequality, it is easy to obtain the proof for 0<α<1.
The preceding theorem splits into two parts. The RTE associated with Xi:n, Hα(Xi:n;t) is lower bound in the first subdivision, represented by (a). Note that under some facts, the specified lower bound can be changed to an upper bound. This bound is generated by combining the RTE in the original situation with the incomplete beta function. On the other hand, we proposed a lower bound on the RTE of Xi:n in part (b) of the theory, which we refer to as Hα(Xi:n;t). This lower bound is expressed via the RTE of ordered uniformly distributed variables and the mode, represented by m, of the underlying distribution. This finding provides interesting insights into the information properties of Xi:n and provides a quantifiable measure of the lower bound of RTE with respect to the mode of the distribution. In Table 1, we list the bounds of the RTE of the order statistics based on Theorem 2.2 for some well-known distributions.
Probability Density Function | Bounds |
Standard half-Cauchy distribution | |
f(x)=2π(1+x2), x>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mi2α−1πα((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)ˉBt21+t2(α−12,12)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(2π)α−1−1] | |
Standard half-normal distribution | |
f(x)=2σ√2πe−(x−μ)2/2σ2, x>μ>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mi√2α+1σα−1πα((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)¯Φ(√α2(t−μσ))−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(2σ√2π)α−1−1] | |
Generalized exponential distribution | |
f(x)=λβe−(x−μ)β(1−e−(x−μ)β)λ−1, x>μ>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Miλαβα−1((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)ˉB1−e−(x−μ)β(α(λ−1)+1,α)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(β(1−1λ)1−λ)1−α−1] | |
Generalized gamma distribution | |
f(x)=bcΓ(c)xc−1e−bx, x>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mibα−1(Γ(c))ααα(c−1)+1((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)Γ(α(c−1)+1,αbt)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(b(c−1)c−1e1−cΓ(c))α−1−1] |
We address the monotonic behavior of the RTE of order statistics in the ensuing lemma. We first offer a core lemma which is fundamental to our research and serves as a foundation for our later discoveries.
Lemma 2.2. Consider two nonnegative functions, q(x) and sβ(x), where q(x) increases in x. Let t and c be real numbers such that 0≤t<c<∞. Additionally, let the random variable Zβ follow pdf fβ(z), where β>0, as
fβ(z)=qrβ(z)sβ(z)∫ctqrβ(x)sβ(x)dx, z∈(t,c). | (2.10) |
Suppose r is real-valued and let Kα be defined as:
Kα(r)=11−α[∫ctqrα(x)sα(x)dx(∫ctqr(x)s1(x)dx)α−1], α>0, α≠1. | (2.11) |
(ⅰ) If for α>1 (0<α<1), Zα≤st(≥st)Z1, then Kα(r) increases in r.
(ⅱ) If for α>1 (0<α<1), Zα≥st(≤st)Z1, then Kα(r) decreases in r.
Proof. Proof of part (ⅰ) is similar to part (ⅱ). Assuming that Kα(r) is differentiable in r, one obtains
∂Kα(r)∂r=11−α∂gα(r)∂r, |
where
gα(r)=∫ctqrα(x)sα(x)dx(∫ctqr(x)s1(x)dx)α. |
It is evident that
∂gα(r)∂r=α(∫ctqr(x)s1(x)dx)α+1×[∫ctlogq(x)qrα(x)sα(x)dx∫ctqr(x)s1(x)dx−∫ctlogq(x)qr(x)s1(x)dx∫ctqrα(x)sα(x)dx]=α∫ctqr(x)s1(x)dx∫ctqrα(x)sα(x)dx(∫ctqr(x)s1(x)dx)α+1[E[logq(Zα)]−E[logq(Z1)]]≤(≥)0. | (2.12) |
Since Zα≤st(≥st)Z1 and, further, since log(⋅) is increasing, thus one can show that E[logq(Zα)]≤(≥)E[logq(Z1)]. This implies that (2.12) is nonpositive (nonnegative). Therefore, Kα(r) increases in r.
Corollary 2.1. In the setting of Lemma 2.2, if q(x) decreases in x, then
(ⅰ) For α>1 (0<α<1), Zα≤st(≥st)Z1, then Kα(r) decreases when r increases.
(ⅱ) If for α>1 (0<α<1), Zα≥st(≤st)Z1, then Kα(r) increases when r increases.
Due to Lemma 2.2, the next corollary can be regarded in the context of (n−i+1)-out-of-n structures where components have uniformly distributed random lifetimes.
Lemma 2.3. (ⅰ) Take into account a parallel (series) system with n components with uniformly distributed lifetime on (0, 1). The RTE of the system's lifetime decreases as the number of components rises.
(ⅱ) If i1≤i2≤n, are integers, then Hα(Ui1:n;t)≤Hα(Ui2:n;t) for t≥i2−1n−1.
Proof. (ⅰ) The presumption is that the system operates in parallel. Analogous reasoning can be applied to a series system to authenticate the outcome via Remark 2.9. From Lemma 2.1, we get
Hα(Un:n;t)=11−α[∫1txα(n−1)dx∫1txn−1dx−1], 0<t<1. |
Therefore, Lemma 2.2 readily reveals that Hα(Ui:n;t) can be depicted as (2.11) where q(x)=x and sα(x)=xα. We adopt the assumption, devoid of any generality loss, that n≥1 is continuous. Considering α>1 (0<α<1),
∫1txα(n−1)dx∫1txn−1dx, |
increases (decreases) in t. Hence, we can establish the inequality
Zα≥st(≤st)Z1, |
where the pdf of Zβ, β>0, is defined in Eq (2.10). By applying Lemma 2.2, we can deduce that the RTE for the parallel structure decreases as more components are included in the system.
(ⅱ) To start, we observe that
Hα(Ui:n;t)=11−α[∫1txα(i−1)(1−x)α(n−i)dx(∫1txi−1(1−x)n−idx)α−1]=11−α[∫1t(x1−x)αi(1−x)nαxαdx(∫1t(x1−x)i(1−x)nxdx)α−1]. |
Furthermore, the pdf of Zα as stated in (2.10) is
fα(z)=(z1−z)αi(1−z)nαzα∫1t(x1−x)αi(1−x)nαxαdx, z∈(t,1), |
where q(x)=x1−x and sα(x)=(1−x)nαxα. Hence, for 1≥z≥t≥i2−1n−1 and α>1 (or 0<α<1), we can write
Zα≤st(≥st)Z1. |
In conclusion, it can be inferred for i1≤i2≤n that
Hα(Ui1:n;t)≤Hα(Ui2:n;t),t≥i2−1n−1, |
and this completes the proof.
Theorem 2.3. Let f (pdf of lifetime components of a parallel (series) system) be increasing (decreasing). Then, the associated RTE of the systems's lifetime decreases as n increases.
Proof. Assuming that Yn∼ˉBF(t)(α(n−1)+1,1), fYn(y) indicates the pdf of Yn. It is clear that
fYn+1(y)fYn(y)=ˉBF(t)(α(n−1)+1,1)ˉBF(t)(αn+1,1)yα, F(t)<y<1, |
increases in y. Consequently, Yn≤lrYn+1 and, therefore, Yn≤stYn+1. Moreover, for α>1 (0<α<1), it is shown that fα−1(F−1(x)) increases (decreases) in x. Therefore,
E[fα−1(F−1(Yn))]≤(≥)E[fα−1(F−1(Yn+1)]. | (2.13) |
From Theorem 2.1, for α>1 (0<α<1), we have
(1−α)Hα(Xn:n;t)+1=[(1−α)Hα(Un:n;F(t))+1]E[fα−1(F−1(Yn))]≤(≥)[(1−α)Hα(Un:n;F(t))+1]E[fα−1(F−1(Yn+1))]≤(≥)[(1−α)Hα(Un+1:n+1;F(t))+1]E[fα−1(F−1(Yn+1))]=(1−α)Hα(Xn+1:n+1;t)+1. |
The first inequality is obtained by noting that (1−α)Hα(Un:n;F(t))+1 is nonnegative. The last inequality is obtained from Part (i) of Lemma 2.3. Thus, one can conclude that Hα(Xn:n;t)≥Hα(Xn+1:n+1;t) for all t>0.
According to the reliability theory, if a series system has more components, we can envision a situation where the pdf decreases and the RTE of the system decreases as well. This occurs when we have a lifespan model with a time-dependent failure rate (h(t)=f(t)/S(t)). The density function of the data distribution must therefore likewise decrease. There are certain lifetime distributions in the dependability domain, where RTE becomes down as the scale parameter is up. This is the case, for instance, when the shape parameter for the Weibull distribution is a≤1, while the shape parameter for the Gamma distribution is b≤1. Consequently, as the number of components increases, the RTE, which is related to the random lifespan brought about by the series structure and where the component lifetimes follow the Gamma (or Weibull) distribution, gets lower.
Now, we want to observe how the RTE of order statistics Xi:n changes with i. We use Part (ⅱ) of Lemma 2.3, which gives us a formula for the RTE of Xi:n in terms of i.
Theorem 2.4. Let f be a decreasing function. Let i1 and i2 be two integers such that i1≤i2≤n. Then, the RTE of the i1-th smallest value of X among n samples, Xi1:n, is less than or equal to the RTE of the i2-th smallest value, Xi2:n, for all values of X that are greater than or equal to the F−1(i2−1n−1)th percentile of F.
Proof. For i1≤i2≤n, one can verify that Yi1≤lrYi2. Thus, Yi1≤stYi2. Now, we have
(1−α)Hα(Xi1:n;t)+1=[(1−α)Hα(Ui1:n;t)+1]E[fα−1(F−1(Yi1))]≥(≤)[(1−α)Hα(Ui1:n;t)+1]E[fα−1(F−1(Yi2))]≥(≤)[(1−α)Hα(Ui2:n;t)+1]E[fα−1(F−1(Yi2))]=(1−α)Hα(Xi2:n;t)+1. |
Using Part (ⅱ) of Lemma 2.3 and by a similar discussion as in the proof of Theorem 2.3, we can obtain the result.
We can get a useful result from Theorem 2.4.
Corollary 2.2. Let f be a decreasing function. Let i be a whole number that is less than or equal to half of n+1. Then, the RTE of Xi:n increases in i as t exceeds the distribution median.
Proof. Suppose i1≤i2≤n+12. This means that
m≥F−1(i2−1n−1), |
in which m=F−1(12) is the middle value of F. By Theorem 2.4, we get for t≥m that Hα(Xi1:n;t)≤Hα(Xi2:n;t).
In this section, we provide some numerical examples in order to showcase the applicability of the obtained results in the previous section and estimate the value of Hα(Xi:n;t), i=1,2,⋯,n, for an exponential distribution with mean 1/λ. Below, we provide an example for illustration of Theorem 2.1.
Example 3.1. Let X be a standard exponential distribution with mean one. Then, f(F−1(u))=1−u, 0<u<1, and
E[fα−1(F−1(Yi))]=ˉB1−e−t(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i+1))ˉB1−e−t(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i)+1). | (3.1) |
Thus, from (2.7), we obtain
Hα(Xi:n;t)=11−α[ˉB1−e−t(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i+1))ˉBα1−e−t(i,n−i+1)−1], i=1,2,⋯,n. | (3.2) |
In Figure 2, we plotted Hα(Xi:n;t) for some values of α and i=1,2,⋯,5 when n=5. When i=1, we can use (3.2) to get
Hα(X1:n;t)=nα−1−α(1−α)α, t>0. |
Also, it is known that
Hα(X;t)=1−α(1−α)α, t>0. |
Therefore, we have
Hα(X1:n;t)−Hα(X;t)=nα−1−1α(1−α), t>0. |
This result exposes an interesting property: Time has no effect on the disparity between the RTE of the lifetime of the series system and the RTE of its constituent parts. Rather, it depends only on two variables: The total number of components in the system and, in the exponential case, the parameter α.
Decreasing pdfs are found in many distributions, including mixtures of Pareto and exponential distributions. Conversely, some distributions such as the power distribution and associated density function have increasing pdfs. For distributions whose pdfs increase or decrease, we can establish a theorem using part (ⅰ) of the Corollary 2.1. However, as the following example demonstrates, this theory is not applicable to all types of (n−i+1)-out-of-n systems, thus caution is advised.
Example 3.2. Let us consider the system operates if, at least, (n−1) of its n components are in action. Then, the system's lifetime is the second smallest component lifetime, X2:n. The components have the same distribution, uniform on (0,1). In Figure 3, we see how the RTE of X2:n changes with n when a=2 and t=0.02. The graph shows that the RTE of the system does not always decrease as n increases. For example, it reveals that Hα(X2:2;0.02) is less than that of Hα(X2:3;0.02).
Here, we demonstrate that the condition t≥F−1(i2−1n−1) is a necessary condition in Theorem 2.4.
Example 3.3. Assume the sf of X is as
S(x)=1(1+x)2, x>0. |
In Figure 4, we see how the RTE of order statistics Xi:5, for i=3,4 and α=2, changes with t, t∈(0,5). The plots show that the RTE of the ordered variables does not always increase or decrease as i goes up for all values of t. For example, for t<F−1(34), the RTE is not monotonic in i.
Hereafter, we carry out a simulation study for illustrating the estimation procedures developed in previous sections. To begin, we obtain the MLE of RTE. Using (2.7), we obtain the residual Tsallis entropy of order statistics based on an exponential distribution with mean 1/λ as follows:
Hα(Xi:n;t)=11−α[λα−1ˉB1−e−λt(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i+1))ˉBα1−e−λt(i,n−i+1)−1], i=1,2,⋯,n. |
Particularly for the case of α=1, and based on Eq (2.9), the Shannon entropy of the ith order statistic can be expressed as follows:
H(Xi:n;t)=H(Ui:n;1−e−λt)−E[log(1−Yi))], |
where Yi∼ˉB1−e−λt(i,n−i+1).
To estimate Hα(Xi:n;t) for simulated exponential data, we use the MLE of λ and we analyze its average bias and root mean square error (RMSE). We compute the bias and RMSE for various number of components (n=5,10,15), different parameter values of λ=1,2, and t=0.5,1,1.5,2. The estimates are based on 5000 repetitions, and the results are shown in Tables 2 and 3. Suppose we have a random sample X1,X2,⋯,Xm drawn from an exponential distribution with mean 1/λ. Then, the MLE of λ is given by ˆλ=m∑mi=1Xi=1¯X. It is worth noting that the statistical data is generated based on the Monte-Carlo simulation. We estimate the values based on 5000 samples with different sample sizes m=n=5,10 and different values of the parameters λ, α, and t. Since MLE is an invariant estimator, we can estimate Hα(Xi:n;t) for an exponential distribution via the MLE given by
ˆHα(Xi:n;t)=11−α[ˆλα−1ˉB1−e−ˆλt(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i+1))ˉBα1−e−ˆλt(i,n−i+1)−1]=11−α[ˉB1−e−t¯X(α(i−1)+1,α(n−i+1))¯Xα−1ˉBα1−e−t¯X(i,n−i+1)−1], |
H0.2(X1:n;t) | H0.2(Xn:n;t) | H(X1:n;t) | H(Xn:n;t) | |||||||
n | λ | t | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE |
20 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.004111 | 0.101963 | 0.023669 | 1.400607 | -0.024673 | 0.232202 | -0.023956 | 0.224504 |
0.5 | -0.002940 | 0.100067 | -0.015000 | 1.364974 | -0.025537 | 0.226118 | -0.026153 | 0.229583 | ||
1.0 | -0.001218 | 0.100482 | -0.022491 | 1.452236 | -0.029445 | 0.227282 | -0.028627 | 0.237049 | ||
1.5 | -0.005024 | 0.101233 | -0.048425 | 1.515576 | -0.024896 | 0.231191 | -0.044507 | 0.279241 | ||
2.0 | -0.001714 | 0.102707 | -0.013366 | 1.513197 | -0.019139 | 0.224888 | -0.057983 | 0.336823 | ||
30 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.001575 | 0.060328 | -0.021352 | 1.138932 | -0.020142 | 0.184149 | -0.011940 | 0.188139 |
0.5 | -0.000900 | 0.060146 | -0.021600 | 1.151689 | -0.015972 | 0.181127 | -0.020274 | 0.183855 | ||
1.0 | 0.000489 | 0.060145 | -0.049570 | 1.154575 | -0.014018 | 0.185117 | -0.018327 | 0.185383 | ||
1.5 | -0.002124 | 0.060362 | -0.079052 | 1.233653 | -0.015212 | 0.183027 | -0.022842 | 0.205462 | ||
2.0 | -0.001410 | 0.059558 | -0.051625 | 1.276884 | -0.014601 | 0.184373 | -0.045161 | 0.252842 | ||
40 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.000932 | 0.041486 | -0.006984 | 0.973690 | -0.013025 | 0.158373 | -0.014442 | 0.157876 |
0.5 | -0.000291 | 0.041090 | 0.010585 | 0.988650 | -0.010680 | 0.160016 | -0.012075 | 0.160450 | ||
1.0 | -0.000965 | 0.041978 | -0.028449 | 1.012318 | -0.010349 | 0.158212 | -0.012004 | 0.162294 | ||
1.5 | -0.001168 | 0.041333 | -0.034202 | 1.053832 | -0.010614 | 0.161088 | -0.016247 | 0.163795 | ||
2.0 | 0.000397 | 0.041325 | -0.027568 | 1.110563 | -0.011821 | 0.157864 | -0.025932 | 0.197784 | ||
20 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.002446 | 0.058226 | -0.007118 | 0.824543 | -0.026646 | 0.228696 | -0.020955 | 0.227106 |
0.5 | -0.001087 | 0.058753 | -0.038594 | 0.833928 | -0.025026 | 0.226999 | -0.030133 | 0.233960 | ||
1.0 | -0.001123 | 0.057952 | -0.012696 | 0.869793 | -0.031726 | 0.224602 | -0.055647 | 0.330609 | ||
1.5 | -0.001031 | 0.059087 | 0.027672 | 0.804698 | -0.022875 | 0.227325 | -0.025042 | 0.332517 | ||
2.0 | -0.002530 | 0.058846 | 0.020016 | 0.720627 | -0.016961 | 0.230532 | -0.014888 | 0.297939 | ||
30 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.000432 | 0.034163 | -0.012610 | 0.655555 | -0.013714 | 0.183895 | -0.016170 | 0.189696 |
0.5 | -0.000803 | 0.034582 | -0.029846 | 0.676429 | -0.012091 | 0.182673 | -0.017238 | 0.183837 | ||
1.0 | -0.000402 | 0.035017 | -0.015309 | 0.736819 | -0.018067 | 0.183517 | -0.043436 | 0.253968 | ||
1.5 | -0.000598 | 0.034962 | -0.005882 | 0.714880 | -0.018234 | 0.185157 | -0.017685 | 0.301256 | ||
2.0 | -0.000930 | 0.034343 | 0.027765 | 0.641635 | -0.016395 | 0.182450 | -0.006860 | 0.268161 | ||
40 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.000400 | 0.023527 | -0.009999 | 0.574911 | -0.008702 | 0.158877 | -0.013224 | 0.162924 |
0.5 | -0.001212 | 0.023618 | -0.004161 | 0.584604 | -0.011959 | 0.160160 | -0.012536 | 0.157172 | ||
1.0 | -0.001119 | 0.023521 | -0.015661 | 0.646895 | -0.013997 | 0.160547 | -0.031483 | 0.197244 | ||
1.5 | -0.000656 | 0.023497 | -0.004489 | 0.632596 | -0.014761 | 0.156546 | -0.028053 | 0.265230 | ||
2.0 | 0.000276 | 0.024035 | 0.019073 | 0.588827 | -0.013667 | 0.155949 | -0.005080 | 0.251386 |
H1.2(X1:n;t) | H1.2(Xn:n;t) | H2(X1:n;t) | H2(Xn:n;t) | |||||||
n | λ | t | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE |
20 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.036685 | 0.348336 | -0.023340 | 0.173762 | -0.452599 | 2.466906 | -0.013824 | 0.064536 |
0.5 | -0.042676 | 0.353032 | -0.022528 | 0.170276 | -0.496878 | 2.514799 | -0.012206 | 0.065292 | ||
1.0 | -0.051450 | 0.351932 | -0.028482 | 0.178117 | -0.484141 | 2.532462 | -0.014892 | 0.067977 | ||
1.5 | -0.042779 | 0.349915 | -0.043827 | 0.216008 | -0.505927 | 2.552919 | -0.025610 | 0.092888 | ||
2.0 | -0.040903 | 0.356226 | -0.054122 | 0.260015 | -0.526016 | 2.547214 | -0.041800 | 0.131094 | ||
30 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.040302 | 0.307586 | -0.013597 | 0.136502 | -0.550497 | 2.972020 | -0.008951 | 0.049803 |
0.5 | -0.027936 | 0.308898 | -0.015890 | 0.137044 | -0.521227 | 3.066964 | -0.009581 | 0.050169 | ||
1.0 | -0.031743 | 0.307648 | -0.013536 | 0.137030 | -0.578099 | 3.001601 | -0.009409 | 0.051671 | ||
1.5 | -0.035009 | 0.308558 | -0.020906 | 0.151498 | -0.566610 | 2.933522 | -0.010304 | 0.054673 | ||
2.0 | -0.042133 | 0.309328 | -0.035845 | 0.198142 | -0.560626 | 2.969982 | -0.021695 | 0.082308 | ||
40 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.026488 | 0.280460 | -0.011294 | 0.119258 | -0.493912 | 3.465678 | -0.007291 | 0.042477 |
0.5 | -0.029448 | 0.281887 | -0.012519 | 0.115980 | -0.475527 | 3.386782 | -0.005798 | 0.042768 | ||
1.0 | -0.025177 | 0.271100 | -0.009937 | 0.118043 | -0.484233 | 3.316020 | -0.006592 | 0.043252 | ||
1.5 | -0.024838 | 0.286013 | -0.014468 | 0.123224 | -0.537798 | 3.378410 | -0.006441 | 0.044033 | ||
2.0 | -0.023824 | 0.280455 | -0.021237 | 0.146304 | -0.479358 | 3.363165 | -0.011877 | 0.054860 | ||
20 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.056318 | 0.411699 | -0.022944 | 0.198262 | -1.072021 | 4.977434 | -0.028913 | 0.128285 |
0.5 | -0.050415 | 0.398105 | -0.027264 | 0.202833 | -0.993129 | 5.071529 | -0.029730 | 0.134172 | ||
1.0 | -0.056414 | 0.397686 | -0.062243 | 0.301835 | -1.138403 | 4.961945 | -0.082598 | 0.266717 | ||
1.5 | -0.032251 | 0.401509 | -0.043805 | 0.321194 | -1.028292 | 5.080591 | -0.074257 | 0.323894 | ||
2.0 | -0.053717 | 0.398513 | -0.021448 | 0.283873 | -0.955008 | 5.100835 | -0.045678 | 0.303842 | ||
30 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.038296 | 0.352777 | -0.018590 | 0.160516 | -1.072724 | 5.855002 | -0.018836 | 0.098837 |
0.5 | -0.043430 | 0.351647 | -0.016782 | 0.160062 | -0.966672 | 5.946254 | -0.017346 | 0.102989 | ||
1.0 | -0.033139 | 0.349205 | -0.039773 | 0.223367 | -1.060875 | 5.911871 | -0.039096 | 0.168524 | ||
1.5 | -0.039873 | 0.352490 | -0.030791 | 0.279365 | -0.999007 | 5.851596 | -0.063707 | 0.255772 | ||
2.0 | -0.040241 | 0.358401 | -0.014475 | 0.250281 | -1.062045 | 6.059834 | -0.039921 | 0.256821 | ||
40 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.038086 | 0.322851 | -0.011819 | 0.137116 | -1.005885 | 6.886099 | -0.013194 | 0.083738 |
0.5 | -0.029491 | 0.319172 | -0.012025 | 0.135845 | -1.052631 | 6.825047 | -0.010727 | 0.084993 | ||
1.0 | -0.032562 | 0.318250 | -0.023726 | 0.172899 | -1.043127 | 6.809147 | -0.021793 | 0.109989 | ||
1.5 | -0.036946 | 0.326066 | -0.032002 | 0.243537 | -1.036542 | 6.796656 | -0.053233 | 0.214256 | ||
2.0 | -0.030189 | 0.321165 | -0.006727 | 0.231400 | -0.995804 | 6.914287 | -0.033001 | 0.230448 |
for i=1,2,⋯,n.
Furthermore, an estimation of the residual entropy of the ith order statistic can be formulated as follows:
H(Xi:n;t)=H(Ui:n;1−e−ˆλt)−E[log(1−Yi))]=H(Ui:n;1−e−t¯X)−E[log(1−Yi))], |
where Yi∼ˉB1−e−t¯X(i,n−i+1).
For simplicity, we only present the results for series and parallel systems for values of α=0.2,1,1.2,2. However, similar trends have been observed for other values of the parameters and sample sizes. The results are displayed in Tables 2 and 3.
In order to evaluate the performance of the suggested estimators, we present a practical application using real-world data, allowing us to analyze and validate their performance in a real-life context.
Example 3.4. We utilize a dataset obtained from [27], which comprises measurements of the strength of 1.5 cm glass fibers conducted at the National Physical Laboratory in England. This dataset serves as the basis for our empirical analysis, which is given as follows:
Data Set: 0.55, 0.93, 1.25, 1.36, 1.49, 1.52, 1.58, 1.61, 1.64, 1.68, 1.73, 1.81, 2.00, 0.74, 1.04, 1.27, 1.39, 1.49, 1.53, 1.59, 1.61, 1.66, 1.68, 1.76, 1.82, 2.01, 0.77, 1.11, 1.28, 1.42, 1.50, 1.54, 1.60, 1.62, 1.66, 1.69, 1.76, 1.84, 2.24, 0.81, 1.13, 1.29, 1.48, 1.50, 1.55, 1.61, 1.62, 1.66, 1.70, 1.77, 1.84, 0.84, 1.24, 1.30, 1.48, 1.51, 1.55, 1.61, 1.63, 1.67, 1.70, 1.78, 1.89
In a study conducted by [22], it was verified that an exponential distribution provides a good fit for the available data. Using this dataset, we computed the MLE of the parameter λ as ˆλ=0.663647. Consequently, for n=5 and t=2, we obtained the following estimates: ˆH0.2(X1:5;2)=1.144167, ˆH0.2(X5:5;2)=8.037384, ˆH1.2(X1:5;2)=−0.2962707, ˆH1.2(X5:5;2)=1.367607, ˆH2(X1:5;2)=−0.6591172, and ˆH2(X5:5;2)=0.7645877.
The concept of RTE for order statistics was discussed in this article. In the context of the RTE of the order statistics of a random sample with uniformly distributed units, we introduce a new method to express the RTE of the order statistics of a continuous random variable. This relationship sheds light on the properties and behavior of the RTE for various distributions. In addition, we have constructed boundary conditions that allow a better understanding of the properties and provide a realistic approximation since it is difficult to find closed-form equations for the RTE of ordered variables. These boundary conditions are useful tools to study and compare the RTE values in different contexts. In addition, we examined how the total number of observations n and the index of order statistics i affect the RTE. We were able to better understand the relationship between the entropy of the general distribution and the position of the order statistic by looking at the variations of the RTE with respect to i and n. We provide illustrative examples to support our results and demonstrate the application of our method. These examples emphasize the usefulness of the RTE for order statistics and show how adaptable our method is for other distributions. In summary, this study improves our understanding of RTE for order statistics by establishing relationships, generating bounds, and examining the effects of index and sample size. The results of this study can be applied to other information measures commonly addressed in the literature, such as historical cumulative Tsallis entropy and dynamic cumulative residual Tsallis entropy.
Mansour Shrahili and Mohamed Kayid: Writing – review & editing. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
The authors are thankful to the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions.
The authors acknowledge financial support from the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2024R464), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
There is no conflict of interest declared by the authors.
[1] |
M. Vidyasagar, Optimal rejection of persistent bounded disturbances, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 31 (1986), 527–534. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1986.1104315 doi: 10.1109/TAC.1986.1104315
![]() |
[2] |
M. Dahleh, J. Pearson, L1 optimal compensators for continuous-time systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 32 (1987), 889–895. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1987.1104455 doi: 10.1109/TAC.1987.1104455
![]() |
[3] | Y. Ohta, H. Maeda, S. Kodama, Rational approximation of L1 optimal controllers for SISO systems, Proceedings of the 30th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Brighton, UK, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.1991.261457 |
[4] | H. Karloff, Linear programming, Springer Science Business Media, 2008. |
[5] | A. W. Naylor, G. R. Sell, Linear operator theory in engineering and science, Springer Science Business Media, 1982. |
[6] |
H. Y. Park, J. H. Kim, Model-free control approach to uncertain Euler-Lagrange equations with a Lyapunov-based L∞-gain analysis, AIMS Math., 8 (2023) 17666–17686. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2023902 doi: 10.3934/math.2023902
![]() |
[7] |
O. R. Kang, J. H. Kim, Robust sliding mode control for robot manipulators with analysis on trade‐off between reaching time and L∞ gain, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 47 (2024), 7270–7287. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.9972 doi: 10.1002/mma.9972
![]() |
[8] |
H. Y. Park, J. H. Kim, K. Yamamoto, A new stability framework for trajectory tracking control of biped walking robots, IEEE Trans. Indus. Inform., 18 (2022), 6767–6777. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2021.3139909 doi: 10.1109/TII.2021.3139909
![]() |
[9] | H. Y. Park, J. H. Kim, Robust balancing control of biped robots for external forces, 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Yokohama, Japan, 2024, 13257–13262. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA57147.2024.10611281 |
[10] |
H. Y. Park, J. H. Kim, The l1 optimal state estimator for load frequency control of power systems: a comparative and extensive study, IEEE Access, 10 (2022), 120680–120689. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3222487 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3222487
![]() |
[11] |
D. Kwak, J. H. Kim, T. Hagiwara, Generalized framework for computing the L∞-induced norm of sampled-data systems, Appl. Math. Comput., 437 (2023), 127518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2022.127518 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2022.127518
![]() |
[12] | D. Kwak, J. H. Kim, T. Hagiwara, A new quasi-finite-rank approximation of compression operators with application to the L1 discretization for sampled-data systems, 2023 62nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Singapore, 2023, 8806–8811. https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC49753.2023.10383268 |
[13] |
D. Kwak, J. H. Kim, T. Hagiwara, A new quasi-finite-rank approximation of compression operators on L∞[0,H) with applications to sampled-data and time-delay systems: piecewise linear kernel approximation approach, J. Franklin Inst., 361 (2024), 107271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2024.107271 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2024.107271
![]() |
[14] |
D. Kwak, J. H. Kim, T. Hagiwara, Robust stability analysis of sampled-data systems with uncertainties characterized by the L∞-induced norm: gridding treatment with convergence rate analysis, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 68 (2023), 8119–8125. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2023.3288631 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2023.3288631
![]() |
[15] |
C. Briat, Robust stability and stabilization of uncertain linear positive systems via integral linear constraints: L1-gain and L∞-gain characterization, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 23 (2013), 1932–1954. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.2859 doi: 10.1002/rnc.2859
![]() |
[16] |
J. Shen, J. Lam, ℓ∞/L∞-gain analysis for positive linear systems with unbounded time-varying delays, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 60 (2014), 857–862. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2014.2344295 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2014.2344295
![]() |
[17] |
G. Yang, F. Hao, L. Zhang, L. Gao, Stabilization of discrete-time positive switched TS fuzzy systems subject to actuator saturation, AIMS Math., 8 (2023), 12708–12728. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2023640 doi: 10.3934/math.2023640
![]() |
[18] |
H. T. Choi, H. Y. Park, J. H. Kim, Output-based event-triggered control for discrete-time system with three types of performance analysis, AIMS Math., 8 (2023), 17091–17111. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2023873 doi: 10.3934/math.2023873
![]() |
[19] |
H. Y. Park, H. T. Choi, J. H. Kim, The l∞/p-gains for discrete-time observer-based event-triggered systems, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 33 (2023), 6121–6134. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.6685 doi: 10.1002/rnc.6685
![]() |
[20] |
W. M. Lu, Rejection of persistent L∞-bounded disturbances for nonlinear systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 43 (1998), 1692–1702. https://doi.org/10.1109/9.736066 doi: 10.1109/9.736066
![]() |
[21] |
H. T. Choi, J. H. Kim, Set-invariance-based interpretations for the L1 performance of nonlinear systems with non-unique solutions, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 33 (2023), 1858 – 1875. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.6469 doi: 10.1002/rnc.6469
![]() |
[22] |
H. T. Choi, J. H. Kim, The L1 controller synthesis for piecewise continuous nonlinear systems via set invariance principles, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 33 (2023), 8670–8692. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.6843 doi: 10.1002/rnc.6843
![]() |
[23] |
H. T. Choi, J. H. Kim, T. Hagiwara, Characterizing L1 output-feedback controller for nonlinear systems: existence conditions via output controlled invariance domain, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 34 (2024), 11760–11785. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.7589 doi: 10.1002/rnc.7589
![]() |
[24] |
F. Blanchini, Set invariance in control, Automatica, 35 (1999), 1747–1767. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-1098(99)00113-2 doi: 10.1016/S0005-1098(99)00113-2
![]() |
[25] | J. P. Aubin, Viability theory, New York, NY, USA: Springer, 1991. |
[26] |
M. Magnehem, R. G. Sanfelice, Sufficient conditions for forward invariance and contractivity in hybrid inclusion using barrier functions, Automatica, 124 (2021), 109328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2020.109328 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2020.109328
![]() |
[27] |
J. P. Richard, Time-delay systems: an overview of some recent advances and open problems, Automatica, 39 (2003), 1667–1694. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-1098(03)00167-5 doi: 10.1016/S0005-1098(03)00167-5
![]() |
[28] | F. A. Rihan, Delay differential equations and applications to biology, Springer, Singapore, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0626-7 |
[29] |
L. P. Song, R. P. Zhang, L. P. Feng, Q. Shi, Pattern dynamics of a spatial epidemic model with time delay, Appl. Math. Comput., 292 (2017), 390–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2016.07.013 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2016.07.013
![]() |
[30] |
H. Gao, T. Chen, J. Lam, A new delay system approach to network-based control, Automatica, 44 (2008), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2007.04.020 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2007.04.020
![]() |
[31] |
M. Jin, S. H. Kang, P. H. Chang, J. Lee, Robust control of robot manipulators using inclusive and enhanced time delay control, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech., 22 (2017), 2141–2152. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2017.2718108 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2017.2718108
![]() |
[32] |
E. Fridman, Tutorial on Lyapunov-based methods for time-delay systems, Eur. J. Control, 20 (2014), 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcon.2014.10.001 doi: 10.1016/j.ejcon.2014.10.001
![]() |
[33] |
P. Park, J. W. Ko, Stability and robust stability for systems with a time-varying delay, Automatica, 43 (2007), 1855–1858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2007.02.022 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2007.02.022
![]() |
[34] |
F. Long, L. Jiang, Y. He, M. Wu, Stability analysis of systems with time-varying delay via novel augmented Lyapunov-Krasovskii functionals and an improved integral inequality, Appl. Math. Comput., 357 (2019), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2019.04.004 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2019.04.004
![]() |
[35] |
T. Petaratip, P. Niamsup, Stability analysis of an unemployment model with time delay, AIMS Math., 6 (2021), 7421–7440. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2021434 doi: 10.3934/math.2021434
![]() |
[36] |
E. Fridman, U. Shaked, Delay-dependent stability and H∞ control: constant and time-varying delays, Int. J. Control, 76 (2003), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020717021000049151 doi: 10.1080/0020717021000049151
![]() |
[37] |
P. Gahinet, Explicit controller formulas for LMI-based H∞ synthesis, Automatica, 32 (1996), 1007–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-1098(96)00033-7 doi: 10.1016/0005-1098(96)00033-7
![]() |
[38] |
G. I. Song, J. H. Kim, Time‐delay compensation‐based robust control of mechanical manipulators: operator‐theoretic analysis and experiment validation, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 47 (2024), 318–335. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.9656 doi: 10.1002/mma.9656
![]() |
[39] |
S. Luemsai, T. Botmar, W. Weera, S. Charoensin, Improved results on mixed passive and H∞ performance for uncertain neural networks with mixed interval time-varying delays via feedback control, AIMS Math., 6 (2021), 2653–2679. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2021161 doi: 10.3934/math.2021161
![]() |
[40] |
M. Sun, Y. Jia, J. Du, F. Yu, Rejection of persistent bounded disturbance for a class of time-delay systems, IFAC Proc. Vol., 41 (2008), 3919–3922. https://doi.org/10.3182/20080706-5-KR-1001.00659 doi: 10.3182/20080706-5-KR-1001.00659
![]() |
[41] | M. Sun, Y. Jia, Persistent bounded disturbance rejection for uncertain time-delay systems, Control Cybern., 38 (2009), 593–607. |
[42] |
P. Li, X. Liu, W. Zhao, Finite-gain L∞ stability from disturbance to output of a class of time delay system, J. Inequal. Appl., 2017 (2017), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-016-1290-y doi: 10.1186/s13660-016-1290-y
![]() |
[43] |
W. Lombardi, S. Olaru, M. Lazar, G. Bitsoris, S. I. Niculescu, On the polyhedral set-invariance conditions for time-delay systems, IFAC Proc. Vol., 44 (2011), 308–313. https://doi.org/10.3182/20110828-6-IT-1002.02803 doi: 10.3182/20110828-6-IT-1002.02803
![]() |
[44] |
M. T. Laraba, S. Olaru, S. I. Niculescu, F. Blanchini, G. Giordano, D. Casagrande, et al., Set invariance for delay difference equations, IFAC-PapersOnLine, 48 (2015), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.09.380 doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.09.380
![]() |
[45] |
M. T. Laraba, S. Olaru, S. I. Niculescu, F. Blanchini, G. Giordano, D. Casagrande, et al., Guide on set invariance for delay difference equations, Ann. Rev. Control, 41 (2016), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2016.04.020 doi: 10.1016/j.arcontrol.2016.04.020
![]() |
[46] | M. W. Hirsch, S. Smale, R. L. Devaney, Differential equations, dynamical systems, and an introduction to chaos, Academic Press, 2013. |
[47] | S. Boyd, L. E. Ghaoui, E. Feron, V. Balakrishnan, Linear matrix inequalities in system and control theory, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), 1994. |
[48] |
M. S. Mahmoud, P. Shi, Persistent bounded disturbance rejection for discrete-time delay systems, Int. J. Syst. Sci., 42 (2011), 921–930. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207720903260150 doi: 10.1080/00207720903260150
![]() |
[49] | K. Zhou, J. C. Doyle, K. Glover, Robust and optimal control, New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall, 1996. |
[50] |
J. Zhou, J. H. Park, H. Shen, Non-fragile reduced-order dynamic output feedback H∞ control for switched systems with average dwell-time switching, Int. J. Control, 89 (206), 281–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207179.2015.1075175 doi: 10.1080/00207179.2015.1075175
![]() |
[51] |
J. Zhou, J. H. Park, Q. Kong, Robust resilient L2-L∞ control for uncertain stochastic systems with multiple time delays via dynamic output feedback, J. Franklin Inst., 353 (2016), 3078–3103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2016.06.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2016.06.004
![]() |
[52] |
W. Ji, J. Qui, S. F. Su, H. Zhang, Fuzzy observer-based output feedback control of continuous-time nonlinear two-dimensional systems, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 31 (2022), 1391–1400. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2022.3201282 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2022.3201282
![]() |
[53] |
W. Ji, J. Qui, C. Song, Y. Fu, New results on nonsynchronous-observer-based output-feedback control of fuzzy-affine-model-based discrete-time nonlinear systems, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 31 (2023), 2836–2847. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2023.3237657 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2023.3237657
![]() |
1. | I. A. Husseiny, M. Nagy, A. H. Mansi, M. A. Alawady, Some Tsallis entropy measures in concomitants of generalized order statistics under iterated FGM bivariate distribution, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 23268, 10.3934/math.20241131 |
Probability Density Function | Bounds |
Standard half-Cauchy distribution | |
f(x)=2π(1+x2), x>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mi2α−1πα((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)ˉBt21+t2(α−12,12)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(2π)α−1−1] | |
Standard half-normal distribution | |
f(x)=2σ√2πe−(x−μ)2/2σ2, x>μ>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mi√2α+1σα−1πα((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)¯Φ(√α2(t−μσ))−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(2σ√2π)α−1−1] | |
Generalized exponential distribution | |
f(x)=λβe−(x−μ)β(1−e−(x−μ)β)λ−1, x>μ>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Miλαβα−1((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)ˉB1−e−(x−μ)β(α(λ−1)+1,α)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(β(1−1λ)1−λ)1−α−1] | |
Generalized gamma distribution | |
f(x)=bcΓ(c)xc−1e−bx, x>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mibα−1(Γ(c))ααα(c−1)+1((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)Γ(α(c−1)+1,αbt)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(b(c−1)c−1e1−cΓ(c))α−1−1] |
H0.2(X1:n;t) | H0.2(Xn:n;t) | H(X1:n;t) | H(Xn:n;t) | |||||||
n | λ | t | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE |
20 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.004111 | 0.101963 | 0.023669 | 1.400607 | -0.024673 | 0.232202 | -0.023956 | 0.224504 |
0.5 | -0.002940 | 0.100067 | -0.015000 | 1.364974 | -0.025537 | 0.226118 | -0.026153 | 0.229583 | ||
1.0 | -0.001218 | 0.100482 | -0.022491 | 1.452236 | -0.029445 | 0.227282 | -0.028627 | 0.237049 | ||
1.5 | -0.005024 | 0.101233 | -0.048425 | 1.515576 | -0.024896 | 0.231191 | -0.044507 | 0.279241 | ||
2.0 | -0.001714 | 0.102707 | -0.013366 | 1.513197 | -0.019139 | 0.224888 | -0.057983 | 0.336823 | ||
30 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.001575 | 0.060328 | -0.021352 | 1.138932 | -0.020142 | 0.184149 | -0.011940 | 0.188139 |
0.5 | -0.000900 | 0.060146 | -0.021600 | 1.151689 | -0.015972 | 0.181127 | -0.020274 | 0.183855 | ||
1.0 | 0.000489 | 0.060145 | -0.049570 | 1.154575 | -0.014018 | 0.185117 | -0.018327 | 0.185383 | ||
1.5 | -0.002124 | 0.060362 | -0.079052 | 1.233653 | -0.015212 | 0.183027 | -0.022842 | 0.205462 | ||
2.0 | -0.001410 | 0.059558 | -0.051625 | 1.276884 | -0.014601 | 0.184373 | -0.045161 | 0.252842 | ||
40 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.000932 | 0.041486 | -0.006984 | 0.973690 | -0.013025 | 0.158373 | -0.014442 | 0.157876 |
0.5 | -0.000291 | 0.041090 | 0.010585 | 0.988650 | -0.010680 | 0.160016 | -0.012075 | 0.160450 | ||
1.0 | -0.000965 | 0.041978 | -0.028449 | 1.012318 | -0.010349 | 0.158212 | -0.012004 | 0.162294 | ||
1.5 | -0.001168 | 0.041333 | -0.034202 | 1.053832 | -0.010614 | 0.161088 | -0.016247 | 0.163795 | ||
2.0 | 0.000397 | 0.041325 | -0.027568 | 1.110563 | -0.011821 | 0.157864 | -0.025932 | 0.197784 | ||
20 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.002446 | 0.058226 | -0.007118 | 0.824543 | -0.026646 | 0.228696 | -0.020955 | 0.227106 |
0.5 | -0.001087 | 0.058753 | -0.038594 | 0.833928 | -0.025026 | 0.226999 | -0.030133 | 0.233960 | ||
1.0 | -0.001123 | 0.057952 | -0.012696 | 0.869793 | -0.031726 | 0.224602 | -0.055647 | 0.330609 | ||
1.5 | -0.001031 | 0.059087 | 0.027672 | 0.804698 | -0.022875 | 0.227325 | -0.025042 | 0.332517 | ||
2.0 | -0.002530 | 0.058846 | 0.020016 | 0.720627 | -0.016961 | 0.230532 | -0.014888 | 0.297939 | ||
30 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.000432 | 0.034163 | -0.012610 | 0.655555 | -0.013714 | 0.183895 | -0.016170 | 0.189696 |
0.5 | -0.000803 | 0.034582 | -0.029846 | 0.676429 | -0.012091 | 0.182673 | -0.017238 | 0.183837 | ||
1.0 | -0.000402 | 0.035017 | -0.015309 | 0.736819 | -0.018067 | 0.183517 | -0.043436 | 0.253968 | ||
1.5 | -0.000598 | 0.034962 | -0.005882 | 0.714880 | -0.018234 | 0.185157 | -0.017685 | 0.301256 | ||
2.0 | -0.000930 | 0.034343 | 0.027765 | 0.641635 | -0.016395 | 0.182450 | -0.006860 | 0.268161 | ||
40 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.000400 | 0.023527 | -0.009999 | 0.574911 | -0.008702 | 0.158877 | -0.013224 | 0.162924 |
0.5 | -0.001212 | 0.023618 | -0.004161 | 0.584604 | -0.011959 | 0.160160 | -0.012536 | 0.157172 | ||
1.0 | -0.001119 | 0.023521 | -0.015661 | 0.646895 | -0.013997 | 0.160547 | -0.031483 | 0.197244 | ||
1.5 | -0.000656 | 0.023497 | -0.004489 | 0.632596 | -0.014761 | 0.156546 | -0.028053 | 0.265230 | ||
2.0 | 0.000276 | 0.024035 | 0.019073 | 0.588827 | -0.013667 | 0.155949 | -0.005080 | 0.251386 |
H1.2(X1:n;t) | H1.2(Xn:n;t) | H2(X1:n;t) | H2(Xn:n;t) | |||||||
n | λ | t | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE |
20 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.036685 | 0.348336 | -0.023340 | 0.173762 | -0.452599 | 2.466906 | -0.013824 | 0.064536 |
0.5 | -0.042676 | 0.353032 | -0.022528 | 0.170276 | -0.496878 | 2.514799 | -0.012206 | 0.065292 | ||
1.0 | -0.051450 | 0.351932 | -0.028482 | 0.178117 | -0.484141 | 2.532462 | -0.014892 | 0.067977 | ||
1.5 | -0.042779 | 0.349915 | -0.043827 | 0.216008 | -0.505927 | 2.552919 | -0.025610 | 0.092888 | ||
2.0 | -0.040903 | 0.356226 | -0.054122 | 0.260015 | -0.526016 | 2.547214 | -0.041800 | 0.131094 | ||
30 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.040302 | 0.307586 | -0.013597 | 0.136502 | -0.550497 | 2.972020 | -0.008951 | 0.049803 |
0.5 | -0.027936 | 0.308898 | -0.015890 | 0.137044 | -0.521227 | 3.066964 | -0.009581 | 0.050169 | ||
1.0 | -0.031743 | 0.307648 | -0.013536 | 0.137030 | -0.578099 | 3.001601 | -0.009409 | 0.051671 | ||
1.5 | -0.035009 | 0.308558 | -0.020906 | 0.151498 | -0.566610 | 2.933522 | -0.010304 | 0.054673 | ||
2.0 | -0.042133 | 0.309328 | -0.035845 | 0.198142 | -0.560626 | 2.969982 | -0.021695 | 0.082308 | ||
40 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.026488 | 0.280460 | -0.011294 | 0.119258 | -0.493912 | 3.465678 | -0.007291 | 0.042477 |
0.5 | -0.029448 | 0.281887 | -0.012519 | 0.115980 | -0.475527 | 3.386782 | -0.005798 | 0.042768 | ||
1.0 | -0.025177 | 0.271100 | -0.009937 | 0.118043 | -0.484233 | 3.316020 | -0.006592 | 0.043252 | ||
1.5 | -0.024838 | 0.286013 | -0.014468 | 0.123224 | -0.537798 | 3.378410 | -0.006441 | 0.044033 | ||
2.0 | -0.023824 | 0.280455 | -0.021237 | 0.146304 | -0.479358 | 3.363165 | -0.011877 | 0.054860 | ||
20 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.056318 | 0.411699 | -0.022944 | 0.198262 | -1.072021 | 4.977434 | -0.028913 | 0.128285 |
0.5 | -0.050415 | 0.398105 | -0.027264 | 0.202833 | -0.993129 | 5.071529 | -0.029730 | 0.134172 | ||
1.0 | -0.056414 | 0.397686 | -0.062243 | 0.301835 | -1.138403 | 4.961945 | -0.082598 | 0.266717 | ||
1.5 | -0.032251 | 0.401509 | -0.043805 | 0.321194 | -1.028292 | 5.080591 | -0.074257 | 0.323894 | ||
2.0 | -0.053717 | 0.398513 | -0.021448 | 0.283873 | -0.955008 | 5.100835 | -0.045678 | 0.303842 | ||
30 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.038296 | 0.352777 | -0.018590 | 0.160516 | -1.072724 | 5.855002 | -0.018836 | 0.098837 |
0.5 | -0.043430 | 0.351647 | -0.016782 | 0.160062 | -0.966672 | 5.946254 | -0.017346 | 0.102989 | ||
1.0 | -0.033139 | 0.349205 | -0.039773 | 0.223367 | -1.060875 | 5.911871 | -0.039096 | 0.168524 | ||
1.5 | -0.039873 | 0.352490 | -0.030791 | 0.279365 | -0.999007 | 5.851596 | -0.063707 | 0.255772 | ||
2.0 | -0.040241 | 0.358401 | -0.014475 | 0.250281 | -1.062045 | 6.059834 | -0.039921 | 0.256821 | ||
40 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.038086 | 0.322851 | -0.011819 | 0.137116 | -1.005885 | 6.886099 | -0.013194 | 0.083738 |
0.5 | -0.029491 | 0.319172 | -0.012025 | 0.135845 | -1.052631 | 6.825047 | -0.010727 | 0.084993 | ||
1.0 | -0.032562 | 0.318250 | -0.023726 | 0.172899 | -1.043127 | 6.809147 | -0.021793 | 0.109989 | ||
1.5 | -0.036946 | 0.326066 | -0.032002 | 0.243537 | -1.036542 | 6.796656 | -0.053233 | 0.214256 | ||
2.0 | -0.030189 | 0.321165 | -0.006727 | 0.231400 | -0.995804 | 6.914287 | -0.033001 | 0.230448 |
Probability Density Function | Bounds |
Standard half-Cauchy distribution | |
f(x)=2π(1+x2), x>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mi2α−1πα((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)ˉBt21+t2(α−12,12)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(2π)α−1−1] | |
Standard half-normal distribution | |
f(x)=2σ√2πe−(x−μ)2/2σ2, x>μ>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mi√2α+1σα−1πα((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)¯Φ(√α2(t−μσ))−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(2σ√2π)α−1−1] | |
Generalized exponential distribution | |
f(x)=λβe−(x−μ)β(1−e−(x−μ)β)λ−1, x>μ>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Miλαβα−1((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)ˉB1−e−(x−μ)β(α(λ−1)+1,α)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(β(1−1λ)1−λ)1−α−1] | |
Generalized gamma distribution | |
f(x)=bcΓ(c)xc−1e−bx, x>0, | ≥(≤)11−α[Mibα−1(Γ(c))ααα(c−1)+1((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)Γ(α(c−1)+1,αbt)−1] |
≥11−α[((1−α)Hα(Ui:n;F(t))+1)(b(c−1)c−1e1−cΓ(c))α−1−1] |
H0.2(X1:n;t) | H0.2(Xn:n;t) | H(X1:n;t) | H(Xn:n;t) | |||||||
n | λ | t | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE |
20 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.004111 | 0.101963 | 0.023669 | 1.400607 | -0.024673 | 0.232202 | -0.023956 | 0.224504 |
0.5 | -0.002940 | 0.100067 | -0.015000 | 1.364974 | -0.025537 | 0.226118 | -0.026153 | 0.229583 | ||
1.0 | -0.001218 | 0.100482 | -0.022491 | 1.452236 | -0.029445 | 0.227282 | -0.028627 | 0.237049 | ||
1.5 | -0.005024 | 0.101233 | -0.048425 | 1.515576 | -0.024896 | 0.231191 | -0.044507 | 0.279241 | ||
2.0 | -0.001714 | 0.102707 | -0.013366 | 1.513197 | -0.019139 | 0.224888 | -0.057983 | 0.336823 | ||
30 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.001575 | 0.060328 | -0.021352 | 1.138932 | -0.020142 | 0.184149 | -0.011940 | 0.188139 |
0.5 | -0.000900 | 0.060146 | -0.021600 | 1.151689 | -0.015972 | 0.181127 | -0.020274 | 0.183855 | ||
1.0 | 0.000489 | 0.060145 | -0.049570 | 1.154575 | -0.014018 | 0.185117 | -0.018327 | 0.185383 | ||
1.5 | -0.002124 | 0.060362 | -0.079052 | 1.233653 | -0.015212 | 0.183027 | -0.022842 | 0.205462 | ||
2.0 | -0.001410 | 0.059558 | -0.051625 | 1.276884 | -0.014601 | 0.184373 | -0.045161 | 0.252842 | ||
40 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.000932 | 0.041486 | -0.006984 | 0.973690 | -0.013025 | 0.158373 | -0.014442 | 0.157876 |
0.5 | -0.000291 | 0.041090 | 0.010585 | 0.988650 | -0.010680 | 0.160016 | -0.012075 | 0.160450 | ||
1.0 | -0.000965 | 0.041978 | -0.028449 | 1.012318 | -0.010349 | 0.158212 | -0.012004 | 0.162294 | ||
1.5 | -0.001168 | 0.041333 | -0.034202 | 1.053832 | -0.010614 | 0.161088 | -0.016247 | 0.163795 | ||
2.0 | 0.000397 | 0.041325 | -0.027568 | 1.110563 | -0.011821 | 0.157864 | -0.025932 | 0.197784 | ||
20 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.002446 | 0.058226 | -0.007118 | 0.824543 | -0.026646 | 0.228696 | -0.020955 | 0.227106 |
0.5 | -0.001087 | 0.058753 | -0.038594 | 0.833928 | -0.025026 | 0.226999 | -0.030133 | 0.233960 | ||
1.0 | -0.001123 | 0.057952 | -0.012696 | 0.869793 | -0.031726 | 0.224602 | -0.055647 | 0.330609 | ||
1.5 | -0.001031 | 0.059087 | 0.027672 | 0.804698 | -0.022875 | 0.227325 | -0.025042 | 0.332517 | ||
2.0 | -0.002530 | 0.058846 | 0.020016 | 0.720627 | -0.016961 | 0.230532 | -0.014888 | 0.297939 | ||
30 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.000432 | 0.034163 | -0.012610 | 0.655555 | -0.013714 | 0.183895 | -0.016170 | 0.189696 |
0.5 | -0.000803 | 0.034582 | -0.029846 | 0.676429 | -0.012091 | 0.182673 | -0.017238 | 0.183837 | ||
1.0 | -0.000402 | 0.035017 | -0.015309 | 0.736819 | -0.018067 | 0.183517 | -0.043436 | 0.253968 | ||
1.5 | -0.000598 | 0.034962 | -0.005882 | 0.714880 | -0.018234 | 0.185157 | -0.017685 | 0.301256 | ||
2.0 | -0.000930 | 0.034343 | 0.027765 | 0.641635 | -0.016395 | 0.182450 | -0.006860 | 0.268161 | ||
40 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.000400 | 0.023527 | -0.009999 | 0.574911 | -0.008702 | 0.158877 | -0.013224 | 0.162924 |
0.5 | -0.001212 | 0.023618 | -0.004161 | 0.584604 | -0.011959 | 0.160160 | -0.012536 | 0.157172 | ||
1.0 | -0.001119 | 0.023521 | -0.015661 | 0.646895 | -0.013997 | 0.160547 | -0.031483 | 0.197244 | ||
1.5 | -0.000656 | 0.023497 | -0.004489 | 0.632596 | -0.014761 | 0.156546 | -0.028053 | 0.265230 | ||
2.0 | 0.000276 | 0.024035 | 0.019073 | 0.588827 | -0.013667 | 0.155949 | -0.005080 | 0.251386 |
H1.2(X1:n;t) | H1.2(Xn:n;t) | H2(X1:n;t) | H2(Xn:n;t) | |||||||
n | λ | t | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE | Bias | RMSE |
20 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.036685 | 0.348336 | -0.023340 | 0.173762 | -0.452599 | 2.466906 | -0.013824 | 0.064536 |
0.5 | -0.042676 | 0.353032 | -0.022528 | 0.170276 | -0.496878 | 2.514799 | -0.012206 | 0.065292 | ||
1.0 | -0.051450 | 0.351932 | -0.028482 | 0.178117 | -0.484141 | 2.532462 | -0.014892 | 0.067977 | ||
1.5 | -0.042779 | 0.349915 | -0.043827 | 0.216008 | -0.505927 | 2.552919 | -0.025610 | 0.092888 | ||
2.0 | -0.040903 | 0.356226 | -0.054122 | 0.260015 | -0.526016 | 2.547214 | -0.041800 | 0.131094 | ||
30 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.040302 | 0.307586 | -0.013597 | 0.136502 | -0.550497 | 2.972020 | -0.008951 | 0.049803 |
0.5 | -0.027936 | 0.308898 | -0.015890 | 0.137044 | -0.521227 | 3.066964 | -0.009581 | 0.050169 | ||
1.0 | -0.031743 | 0.307648 | -0.013536 | 0.137030 | -0.578099 | 3.001601 | -0.009409 | 0.051671 | ||
1.5 | -0.035009 | 0.308558 | -0.020906 | 0.151498 | -0.566610 | 2.933522 | -0.010304 | 0.054673 | ||
2.0 | -0.042133 | 0.309328 | -0.035845 | 0.198142 | -0.560626 | 2.969982 | -0.021695 | 0.082308 | ||
40 | 1 | 0.0 | -0.026488 | 0.280460 | -0.011294 | 0.119258 | -0.493912 | 3.465678 | -0.007291 | 0.042477 |
0.5 | -0.029448 | 0.281887 | -0.012519 | 0.115980 | -0.475527 | 3.386782 | -0.005798 | 0.042768 | ||
1.0 | -0.025177 | 0.271100 | -0.009937 | 0.118043 | -0.484233 | 3.316020 | -0.006592 | 0.043252 | ||
1.5 | -0.024838 | 0.286013 | -0.014468 | 0.123224 | -0.537798 | 3.378410 | -0.006441 | 0.044033 | ||
2.0 | -0.023824 | 0.280455 | -0.021237 | 0.146304 | -0.479358 | 3.363165 | -0.011877 | 0.054860 | ||
20 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.056318 | 0.411699 | -0.022944 | 0.198262 | -1.072021 | 4.977434 | -0.028913 | 0.128285 |
0.5 | -0.050415 | 0.398105 | -0.027264 | 0.202833 | -0.993129 | 5.071529 | -0.029730 | 0.134172 | ||
1.0 | -0.056414 | 0.397686 | -0.062243 | 0.301835 | -1.138403 | 4.961945 | -0.082598 | 0.266717 | ||
1.5 | -0.032251 | 0.401509 | -0.043805 | 0.321194 | -1.028292 | 5.080591 | -0.074257 | 0.323894 | ||
2.0 | -0.053717 | 0.398513 | -0.021448 | 0.283873 | -0.955008 | 5.100835 | -0.045678 | 0.303842 | ||
30 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.038296 | 0.352777 | -0.018590 | 0.160516 | -1.072724 | 5.855002 | -0.018836 | 0.098837 |
0.5 | -0.043430 | 0.351647 | -0.016782 | 0.160062 | -0.966672 | 5.946254 | -0.017346 | 0.102989 | ||
1.0 | -0.033139 | 0.349205 | -0.039773 | 0.223367 | -1.060875 | 5.911871 | -0.039096 | 0.168524 | ||
1.5 | -0.039873 | 0.352490 | -0.030791 | 0.279365 | -0.999007 | 5.851596 | -0.063707 | 0.255772 | ||
2.0 | -0.040241 | 0.358401 | -0.014475 | 0.250281 | -1.062045 | 6.059834 | -0.039921 | 0.256821 | ||
40 | 2 | 0.0 | -0.038086 | 0.322851 | -0.011819 | 0.137116 | -1.005885 | 6.886099 | -0.013194 | 0.083738 |
0.5 | -0.029491 | 0.319172 | -0.012025 | 0.135845 | -1.052631 | 6.825047 | -0.010727 | 0.084993 | ||
1.0 | -0.032562 | 0.318250 | -0.023726 | 0.172899 | -1.043127 | 6.809147 | -0.021793 | 0.109989 | ||
1.5 | -0.036946 | 0.326066 | -0.032002 | 0.243537 | -1.036542 | 6.796656 | -0.053233 | 0.214256 | ||
2.0 | -0.030189 | 0.321165 | -0.006727 | 0.231400 | -0.995804 | 6.914287 | -0.033001 | 0.230448 |