Research article Special Issues

Development of a new statistical distribution with insights into mathematical properties and applications in industrial data in KSA

  • This study presents the development of a novel distribution through a transformation involving error functions, namely the error function inverse Weibull model, along with an overview of the fundamental characteristics of the proposed model. The hazard function of the recommended model is very flexible; it fits increasing, decreasing, and unimodal factors. For estimating the unknown parameters, we suggested two estimation methods, including the maximum likelihood estimation and Bayesian techniques. We perform a Monte Carlo simulation analysis to assess the stability of the parameter estimation procedure. The numerical results of these simulations show that the Bayesian technique under the square error loss function performs better than another method to obtain the model parameters. We thoroughly examine the significance of the proposed model and illustrate its application using three real-world data sets from the industrial sector. We compared the suitability and flexibility of the suggested distribution with several others, and the results showed that it fits the real-world data better than the competing models.

    Citation: Badr Aloraini, Abdulaziz S. Alghamdi, Mohammad Zaid Alaskar, Maryam Ibrahim Habadi. Development of a new statistical distribution with insights into mathematical properties and applications in industrial data in KSA[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 7463-7488. doi: 10.3934/math.2025343

    Related Papers:

    [1] Nora Nader, Dina A. Ramadan, Hanan Haj Ahmad, M. A. El-Damcese, B. S. El-Desouky . Optimizing analgesic pain relief time analysis through Bayesian and non-Bayesian approaches to new right truncated Fréchet-inverted Weibull distribution. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 31217-31245. doi: 10.3934/math.20231598
    [2] Ehab M. Almetwally, Ahlam H. Tolba, Dina A. Ramadan . Bayesian and non-Bayesian estimations for a flexible reduced logarithmic-inverse Lomax distribution under progressive hybrid type-Ⅰ censored data with a head and neck cancer application. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 9171-9201. doi: 10.3934/math.2025422
    [3] Hassan Okasha, Mazen Nassar, Saeed A. Dobbah . E-Bayesian estimation of Burr Type XII model based on adaptive Type-Ⅱ progressive hybrid censored data. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 4173-4196. doi: 10.3934/math.2021247
    [4] Alanazi Talal Abdulrahman, Khudhayr A. Rashedi, Tariq S. Alshammari, Eslam Hussam, Amirah Saeed Alharthi, Ramlah H Albayyat . A new extension of the Rayleigh distribution: Methodology, classical, and Bayes estimation, with application to industrial data. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(2): 3710-3733. doi: 10.3934/math.2025172
    [5] Haiping Ren, Ziwen Zhang, Qin Gong . Estimation of Shannon entropy of the inverse exponential Rayleigh model under progressively Type-Ⅱ censored test. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 9378-9414. doi: 10.3934/math.2025434
    [6] 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
    [7] Rashad M. EL-Sagheer, Mohamed S. Eliwa, Khaled M. Alqahtani, Mahmoud El-Morshedy . Bayesian and non-Bayesian inferential approaches under lower-recorded data with application to model COVID-19 data. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 15965-15981. doi: 10.3934/math.2022873
    [8] M. G. M. Ghazal . Modified Chen distribution: Properties, estimation, and applications in reliability analysis. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 34906-34946. doi: 10.3934/math.20241662
    [9] Heba S. Mohammed . Empirical E-Bayesian estimation for the parameter of Poisson distribution. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8205-8220. doi: 10.3934/math.2021475
    [10] Amal S. Hassan, Najwan Alsadat, Oluwafemi Samson Balogun, Baria A. Helmy . Bayesian and non-Bayesian estimation of some entropy measures for a Weibull distribution. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 32646-32673. doi: 10.3934/math.20241563
  • This study presents the development of a novel distribution through a transformation involving error functions, namely the error function inverse Weibull model, along with an overview of the fundamental characteristics of the proposed model. The hazard function of the recommended model is very flexible; it fits increasing, decreasing, and unimodal factors. For estimating the unknown parameters, we suggested two estimation methods, including the maximum likelihood estimation and Bayesian techniques. We perform a Monte Carlo simulation analysis to assess the stability of the parameter estimation procedure. The numerical results of these simulations show that the Bayesian technique under the square error loss function performs better than another method to obtain the model parameters. We thoroughly examine the significance of the proposed model and illustrate its application using three real-world data sets from the industrial sector. We compared the suitability and flexibility of the suggested distribution with several others, and the results showed that it fits the real-world data better than the competing models.



    Probability distributions are very important in modeling and fitting random phenomena in all areas of life. In the literature on distribution theory, there are various probability distributions for analyzing and predicting multiple kinds of data in many sectors, including life, biology, medical science, insurance, finance, engineering, and industry [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. Based on existing findings, industrial data often exhibits a thick right tail, and many authors have developed several well-known right-skewed families. Afify et al. [10] defined the power-modified Kies-exponential distribution. Coşkun et al. [11] introduced the modified-Lindley distribution, and Gómez et al. [12] proposed the power piecewise exponential model. In addition, Dhungana and Kumar [13] proposed an exponentiated odd Lomax exponential distribution, while Hassan et al. [14] introduced the alpha power transformed extended exponential distribution. In the same line, Karakaya et al. [15], presented a unit-Lindley distribution, and Tung et al. [16] developed the Arcsine-X family of distributions.

    To bring further flexibility to these generated distributions, various approaches of well-known models have been defined and used in several applied sciences to allow the smoothing parameter to vary across different locations in the data space. One of the new model-generating techniques is the error function (EF) transformation, which was first proposed by Fernández and De Andrade [17]. The cumulative distribution function (CDF) and the corresponding probability distribution function (PDF) of the EF transformation are as follows:

    Δ(y)=erf(H(y)1H(y)),yR, (1.1)

    and

    δ(y)=2h(y)π(1H(y))2 exp{(H(y)1H(y))2}. (1.2)

    The EF transformation is a novel method for generalizing a given model, which transforms a distribution without adding any parameters. It is a modified version of traditional probability distributions for the relative importance or worth of data points. This strategy improves flexibility, allowing analysts to better explain real-world scenarios in which traditional random sampling fails to capture the underlying data structure. The derivation of the new attractive EF transformation to modify the existing distribution helps the fitting power of the existing distributions. The proposed method has many applications that extend to fitting, especially in industrial domains. However, recent works considering the EF technique, such as [18,19].

    The inverse Weibull (IW) distribution is widely used in reliability and lifetime modeling for mortality rates, especially when studying extreme events. Since it captures tail behavior effectively, it is effective in understanding the upper quantiles of life expectancy or survival time. The CDF of the IW distribution, denoted as G(x), is defined as follows:

    G(x)=eθxβ,;  x, θ,β>0. (1.3)

    In reference to G(x) as stated in Eq (1.3), the PDF g(x) is formulated as:

    g(x)=θβ x(β+1) eθxβ. (1.4)

    The IW model has undoubtedly established itself as a crucial tool for data modeling across nearly all sectors. However, despite its widespread use and advantages, the IW distribution is constrained by its inherent limitations. One of the primary constraints of the IW distribution is its capacity to represent solely monotonic forms of hazard functions, as it can only model situations where the hazard rate increases or decreases consistently over time. More papers have used the IW model for many different statistical models, such as the following : Alzeley et al. [20] discussed statistical inference under censored data for IW model, Hussam et al. [21] discussed fuzzy vs. traditional reliability models, Ahmad et al. [22] derived the new cotangent IW model, Mohamed et al. [23] discussed Bayesian and E-Bayesian estimation for an odd generalized exponential IW model. Abdelall et al. [24] introduced a new extension of the odd IW model. Al Mutairi et al. [25] obtained Bayesian and non-Bayesian inference based on a jointly type-Ⅱ hybrid censoring model. Hassan et al. [26] discussed the statistical analysis of IW based on step-stress partially accelerated life testing. Alsadat et al. [27] presented novel Kumaraswamy power IW distribution with data analysis related to diverse scientific areas.

    In this paper, we focus on providing a new form of the IW distribution for analyzing the datasets of different areas and highlighting specific characteristics. We extend this distribution by using the approach discussed in equation (1.1), and the resultant distribution is named the error function inverse Weibull (EF-IW) model. This heightened flexibility allows for a better fit to datasets with diverse kurtotic characteristics, enhancing the model's applicability across various scenarios. Further, the key objectives of the current study are as follows.

    (1) The primary objective was extending the EF-IW distribution using the error function method, allowing for the derivation and investigation of its essential mathematical characteristics.

    (2) The second main goal was to estimate the models' parameters using two different estimation methods, such as the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) and Bayesian estimator, under different loss functions via Metropolis-Hastings (MH) algorithms. We conduct a detailed simulation study to demonstrate the behavior of derived estimators and pinpoint the most efficient estimation method.

    (3) Two data sets from the industry field are utilized to illustrate the applicability and utilization of the proposed distribution.

    The following is the organization of the study. Section 2 introduces the model description and the extension distribution, while Section 3 discusses various statistical properties such as moments, quantiles, and moment-generating functions. In Section 4, parameters are estimated using two different estimation methods. The performance of the EF-IW distribution using simulation is carried out and illustrated using three real industrial data sets in Sections 5 and 6, respectively. Finally, Section 7 presents the concluding remark of the paper.

    Here, we provide the inverse Weibull distribution as a classical distribution. Plugging Eqs (1.3) and (1.4) into Eqs (1.1) and (1.2) gives the CDF and PDF of the new EF-IW model:

    Ξ(z)=erf(eθzβ1eθzβ),z,θ,β>0, (2.1)

    and

    ξ(z)=2θβ z(β+1) eθzβπ(1eθzβ)2 exp{(eθzβ1eθzβ)2}, (2.2)

    where erf(x)=2πx0ez2dz. The plots of the EF-IW PDF for some parameter values given in Figure 1 reveal that this function can be decreasing, unimodal, and skewed depending on the parameter values.

    Figure 1.  PDF curves for the EF-IW model based on various selected parameter values.

    Suppose the random variable Z has a CDF denoted by Ξ(z). Then, its survival function (SF) and hazard rate function (HRF) can then be expressed as

    S(z)=1erf(eθzβ1eθzβ), (2.3)

    and

    h(z)=2θβ z(β+1) eθzβπ(1eθzβ)2[1erf(t)] exp{t}, (2.4)

    with t=(eθzβ1eθzβ)2.

    Next, the cumulative hazard rate function (CHRF) and reversed hazard rate function (RHRF) of the random variable Z can be expressed as

    H(z)=log[1erf(eθzβ1eθzβ)], (2.5)

    and

    R(z)=2θβ z(β+1) eθzβπ(1eθzβ)2 erf(eθzβ1eθzβ). (2.6)

    Figure 2 shows HRF plots of EF-IW for different sets of parameter values. It has increasing, unimodal, and decreasing shapes.

    Figure 2.  HRF curves for the EF-IW model based on various selected parameter values.

    The quantile function Ξ1(u) holds significant importance in simulation studies across various disciplines due to its ability to generate random variables with desired distribution characteristics.The quantile function of the new EF-IW model can be expressed as

    Ξ1(u)=[1θlog(erf1(u)1+erf1(u))]1/β,0u1, (3.1)

    where erf1(x)=Φ1(x) is the standard normal quantile function.

    Proof. By setting the Eq (2.1) equal u, we get

    erf(eθzβ1eθzβ)=u,eθzβ1eθzβ=erf1(u),eθzβ(1+erf1(u))=erf1(u),eθzβ=erf1(u)1+erf1(u),θzβ=log(erf1(u)1+erf1(u)),z=[1θlog(erf1(u)1+erf1(u))]1/β.

    The quantile function can be used to compute the first, second, and third quantiles by replacing u with 14, 12, and 34.

    Additionally, the Bowleys skewness (N) and Moors kurtosis (M) of the EF-IW model are described as

    N=Ξ1(1/4)+Ξ1(3/4)2Ξ1(1/2)Ξ1(3/4)Ξ1(1/4),

    and

    M=Ξ1(7/8)Ξ1(5/8)+Ξ1(3/8)Ξ1(1/8)Ξ1(6/8)Ξ1(2/8).

    In this part, we provide a series representation of the EF-IW CDF and PDF by employing the erf series, see Fernández and De Andrade [17] and Ajongba et al. [18],

    erf(t)=2(π)l=0(1)lt2l+1l!(2l+1),

    and by applying the expansion

    t1t=j=0tj, |t|<1,

    the corresponding CDF of the EF-IW distribution can be rewritten as:

    Ξ(z)=2(π)l=0(1)ll!(2l+1) [j=0 eθzβ]2l+1.

    Now, consider the series expansion

    [j=0ajtj]k=n=0Dk,n tn,

    where Dk,0=ak0 and Dk,n=1n a0ns=1 (skn+s) as Dk,ns,  n1.

    Consequently, the EF-IW CDF takes the expression

    Ξ(z)=2πl=0n=0(1)lD2l+1,nl!(2l+1) eθ(n+2l+1)zβ=l=0n=0Cl,n eθ(n+2l+1)zβ,

    with Cl,n=2(1)lD2l+1,nπl!(2l+1), D2l+1,n=1nns=1[2s(l+1)n] D2l+1,ns and D2l+1,0=1.

    Similarly, the density of the recommended EF-IW model becomes

    ξ(z)=θβl=0n=0 Hl,n zβ1 eθ(n+2l)zβ,

    with Hl,n=Cl,n(n+2l+1).

    One of the efficient statistical criteria that can calculate symmetry, spread-ness, and asymmetry is the ordinary moment. The r-th moment of the EF-IW distribution, whose PDF is given in Eq (2.2), can be determined as follows:

    μr=θl=0n=0Hl,n Γ(1rβ)[θ(2l+n)]1rβ, (3.2)

    where Γ(.) represents the gamma function.

    Thus, for r=1 and r=2, the mean (μ1) and second moment (μ2) of the EF-IW distribution are defined, respectively, as

    μ1=θl=0n=0Hl,n Γ(11β)[θ(2l+n)]11β,

    and

    μ2=θl=0n=0Hl,n Γ(12β)[θ(2l+n)]12β.

    The variance (Varz) with a corresponding coefficient of variation (CV) for the EF-IW model are obtained to be

    VarZ=μ2μ21,

    and

    CV=VarZμ1.

    Table 1 defined various proposed mathematical characteristics of the suggested EF-IW. In addition, Figure 3 shows the 3D plots of these statistical properties.

    Table 1.  Statistical properties of EF-IW with different values of parameters.
    β μ1 VarZ CV N M
    θ=0.4 0.3 0.0874 0.0234 1.7508 4.3227 30.106
    0.6 0.2287 0.0351 0.8190 1.5817 3.3285
    0.9 0.3488 0.0369 0.5506 0.8949 0.7335
    1.2 0.4412 0.034 0.4179 0.5665 0.0143
    θ=0.6 0.3 0.3375 0.3492 1.7508 4.3227 30.106
    0.6 0.4495 0.1355 0.8190 1.5817 3.3285
    0.9 0.5473 0.0908 0.5506 0.8949 0.7335
    1.2 0.6186 0.0668 0.4179 0.5665 0.0143
    θ=0.8 0.3 0.8806 2.3770 1.7508 4.3227 30.106
    0.6 0.7260 0.3535 0.8190 1.5817 3.3285
    0.9 0.7534 0.1721 0.5506 0.8949 0.7335
    1.2 0.7862 0.1080 0.4179 0.5665 0.0143
    θ=1.2 0.3 3.4022 35.479 1.7508 4.3227 30.106
    0.6 1.4270 1.3659 0.8190 1.5817 3.3285
    0.9 1.1822 0.4238 0.5506 0.8949 0.7335
    1.2 1.1022 0.2122 0.4179 0.5665 0.0143
    θ=1.5 0.3 7.1581 157.05 1.7508 4.3227 30.106
    0.6 2.0699 2.8737 0.8190 1.5817 3.3285
    0.9 1.5149 0.6958 0.5506 0.8949 0.7335
    1.2 1.3274 0.3078 0.4179 0.5665 0.0143

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 3.  Plots for μ1, VarZ, ID, N, and M for distinct parameter choice.

    The moment generating function (MGF), M(t) of the KMIW model is derived as

    M(t)=θl=0n=0r=0Hl,n trr! Γ(1rβ)[θ(2l+n)]1rβ.

    The PDF of the rth-order statistics for a sample of size m taken from the EF-IW model is expressed as follows:

    k(r)(z)=m!ξ(z)(r1)!(mr)![Ξ(z)]r1[1Ξ(z)]mr=m!(r1)!(mr)! θβl=0n=0 Hl,n zβ1 eθ(n+2l)zβ [l=0n=0Cl,n eθ(n+2l+1)zβ]r1×[1l=0n=0Cl,n eθ(n+2l+1)zβ]mr.

    In a special case, the PDF of the minimum 1th and maximum mth order statistics of the EF-IW distribution can be given below as

    k(1)(z)=mθβl=0n=0 Hl,n zβ1 eθ(n+2l)zβ [1l=0n=0Cl,n eθ(n+2l+1)zβ]1r,

    and

    k(m)(z)=mθβl=0n=0 Hl,n zβ1 eθ(n+2l)zβ [l=0n=0Cl,n eθ(n+2l+1)zβ]m1.

    The corresponding CDF of the EF-IW model can be written as

    K(r)(z)=mk=0Ξk(z)[1Ξ(z)]mk=mk=0[l=0n=0Cl,n eθ(n+2l+1)zβ]k [1l=0n=0Cl,n eθ(n+2l+1)zβ]mk.

    In this part of the study, we estimate the models' parameters η=(β,θ) using two different estimation methods. For this purpose, the maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimators are the estimation methods used.

    Assuming {z1,z2,,zm} are the observed values of a random sample {Z1,Z2,,Zm} from the EF-IW distribution with vector of parameters η=(β,θ), the log-likelihood function can be obtained to be

    LL(z)=mi=1logξ(z)=mi=1log(2θβ z(β+1) eθzβπ(1eθzβ)2 exp{(eθzβ1eθzβ)2})mlogθ+mlogβ2mi=1log(1eθzβi)θmi=1zβi(β+1)mi=1logzimi=1(eθzβi1eθzβi)2. (4.1)

    With the vector of the parameters η=(β,θ), the corresponding partial derivatives of Eq (4.1) are obtained as:

    LL(z;ϑ)θ=mθ2mi=1zβieθzβi1eθzβimi=1zβi+2[mi=1zβi e3θzβi(1eθzβi)3+mi=1zβi e2θzβi(1eθzβi)2], (4.2)

    and

    LL(z;ϑ)β=mβmi=1logzβiθmi=1zβilogzi+2θ[mi=1zβilogzi e3θzβi(1eθzβi)3+mi=1zβilogzi e2θzβi(1eθzβi)2]. (4.3)

    The parameter estimates for the parameters η=(β,θ) can be obtained by solving the above non-linear equations with respect to the parameters. It might be difficult to obtain a precise solution to the derived equations, and thus one option to optimize them is to use techniques like the Newton-Raphson algorithm. We used the R software's optimize function in this case.

    We proceed based on the information available on the unknown parameters obtained from the opinions of the researchers. The interpretation of the informative prior is rarely precise enough to determine a single prior distribution. However, there are laws calibrated according to the distribution of observations, called the conjugate prior or the gamma prior. For more details, see Xu [28] and Zhuang [29]. Assuming that the unknown parameters β and θ are random variables that have a Gamma distribution with PDF expressed as

    π1(θ)=ba11Γ(a1) θa11 eb1θ,   θ,a1,b1>0,

    and

    π1(β)=ba22Γ(a2s) βa21 eb2β,   β,a2,b2>0.

    Henceforth, the joint prior PDF of η=(β,θ) can be derived as

    π(ϑ)θa11 βa21 eb1θb2β.

    Next, the joint posterior PDF of η=(β,θ) is

    π(ϑz)=L(ϑ))π(ϑ)z)θm+a11 βm+a21 eb1θb2βmi=1=z(β+1)i eθzβi(1eθzβi)2 exp{(eθzβi1eθzβi)2}.

    The Bayes estimates of the parametric function η=(β,θ) under the assumption of the square error loss function (BSE) is the posterior mean of η. The BSE is

    ˆfSE=ηf π(ϑz)dη. (4.4)

    Now, the Bayes estimator under linear exponential loss function (BLI), can be written f=eδ(ηˆη)δ(ηˆη). The BLI is

    ˆfLI=1δlog(ηeδf π(ηz)dη). (4.5)

    In the end, the Bayes estimator under general entropy loss function (BGE), defined as f=(ˆηη)δδlog(ˆηη)1, is

    ˆfGE=(ηfδ π(ηz)dη)1/δ, (4.6)

    with δ0. It is difficult to obtain analytical expressions of Eqs (4.4)–(4.6). To solve this issue, we have considered the Metropolis Hasting (MH) algorithm for this purpose.

    In this section, a detailed simulation study is carried out to examine the behavior of two derived estimators using the R software to evaluate the efficiency of the recommended estimators. The results are presented for various sample sizes m={30,60,80,100} from the proposed EF-IW distribution and several parameter values of η=(β,θ) (Set 1: (0.5, 0.75), Set 2: (0.8, 1.25), and Set 3: (1.2, 1.5)) to provide more accurate and comprehensive results. The Monte Carlo simulations are repeated 1000 times, and the estimates are assessed based on the mean estimate (AEs) and mean squared errors (MSEs). The empirical results are illustrated in Tables (2)(4), and in this simulation, we choose δ=1.5 to compute the BLI and BGE. To check that the iterative non-linear method converges to the MLEs, we have applied the Newton Raphson technique with some other initial estimates, and it converges to the same set of estimates, which ensures that the estimates obtained via the suggested Newton Raphson method converges to the MLEs. The following conclusions are drawn from these tables.

    Table 2.  Numerical values of EF-IW model simulation for Set 1.
    m MLE BSE BLI BGE
    Mean MSE Mean MSE Mean MSE Mean MSE
    30 θ 0.4919 0.0039 0.4502 0.0035 0.4505 0.0037 0.4496 0.0039
    β 0.7802 0.0115 0.7496 0.0008 0.7497 0.0101 0.7494 0.0103
    60 θ 0.4928 0.0018 0.5093 0.0010 0.5093 0.0013 0.5085 0.0015
    β 0.7681 0.0051 0.7395 0.0007 0.7396 0.0009 0.7393 0.0101
    80 θ 0.5007 0.0011 0.4888 0.0006 0.4888 0.0008 0.4886 0.0010
    β 0.7586 0.0034 0.7882 0.0005 0.7883 0.0008 0.7880 0.0009
    100 θ 0.4943 0.0010 0.5091 0.0004 0.5093 0.0005 0.5087 0.0008
    β 0.7591 0.0024 0.7577 0.0004 0.7581 0.0006 0.7573 0.0008

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 3.  Numerical values of EF-IW model simulation for Set 2.
    m MLE BSE BLI BGE
    Mean MSE Mean MSE Mean MSE Mean MSE
    30 θ 0.7998 0.0055 0.8643 0.0039 0.8645 0.0041 0.4816 0.0043
    β 1.2981 0.0309 1.3373 0.0121 1.3384 0.0123 1.3364 0.0125
    60 θ 0.8001 0.0024 0.8358 0.0015 0.8359 0.0017 0.8357 0.0019
    β 1.2646 0.0148 1.1742 0.0075 1.1746 0.0078 1.1738 0.0079
    80 θ 0.7993 0.0023 0.7856 0.0014 0.7859 0.0016 0.7852 0.0018
    β 1.2641 0.0075 1.2241 0.0017 1.2244 0.0020 1.2239 0.0021
    100 θ 0.7948 0.0014 0.8046 0.0007 0.8048 0.0009 0.8044 0.0011
    β 1.2673 0.0072 1.2320 0.0011 1.2322 0.0013 1.2319 0.0015

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 4.  Numerical values of EF-IW model simulation for Set 3.
    m MLE BSE BLI BGE
    Mean MSE Mean MSE Mean MSE Mean MSE
    30 θ 1.2240 0.0188 1.2206 0.0051 1.2217 0.0053 1.2196 0.0055
    β 1.5799 0.0559 1.6200 0.0245 1.6225 0.0248 1.6184 0.0249
    60 θ 1.2049 0.0065 1.2310 0.0032 1.2316 0.0034 1.2306 0.0036
    β 1.5556 0.0215 1.5530 0.0058 1.5538 0.0061 1.5526 0.0062
    80 θ 1.2035 0.0040 1.2276 0.0023 1.2280 0.0025 1.2272 0.0028
    β 1.5524 0.0159 1.4679 0.0032 1.4685 0.0034 1.4676 0.0035
    100 θ 1.2139 0.0041 1.2160 0.0019 1.2165 0.0022 1.2157 0.0024
    β 1.5158 0.0113 1.4818 0.0022 1.4822 0.0023 1.4815 0.0025

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    (1) All estimation approaches produce estimates that converge toward the true parameter values as the sample size increases, which confirm that they are consistent and asymptotically unbiased.

    (2) In most cases, the value of MSEs decreases as the value of m increases.

    (3) As m increases, the Bayes estimates tends to perform efficiently based on MSE as an optimal criterion. On the contrary, BSE is more appropriate than BLI and BGE.

    (4) Figure (4) ensures the same conclusion.

    Figure 4.  MSE plots based on all proposed estimators using various selected parameter values.

    In this section, we utilized two data sets from the industrial field to show the EF-IW model introduced in Section 2. We demonstrate the flexibility of this new distribution by analyzing two real-world datasets drawn from industrial areas in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).

    The data set represents the quarterly evolution of the number of foreign licenses in the construction sector in KSA. It was obtained from https://datasaudi.sa/en/sector/construction#real-sector-indicators. The values of the data set are summarized in Table (5).

    Table 5.  The quarterly evolution of the number of foreign licenses data set.
    8 6 8 16 23 20 28 40
    43 50 54 32 52 29 33 42
    41 52 56 79 155 84 95 111
    136 161 204 241

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The second application introduced the scale efficiency of the construction industry in KSA between 2013 and 2022. The suggested data set was considered by Yu et al. [30], and the values are presented in Table (6).

    Table 6.  The scale efficiency of the construction industry data set.
    Zone 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
    Mecca 9.39 9.71 9.83 9.96 9.97 9.95 9.98 9.97 10.005 9.96
    Eastern 8.92 9.23 9.43 9.56 9.58 9.71 9.78 9.72 9.82 9.87
    Al-Madinah 7.46 7.47 7.81 8.52 8.62 8.61 8.73 8.43 8.74 8.77
    Jizan 6.66 6.69 6.84 7.64 7.71 7.75 7.75 7.68 7.82 7.82
    Al-Qassim 6.6 6.62 6.67 7.47 7.51 7.53 7.67 7.6 7.73 7.73
    Tabuk 5.31 5.46 5.66 6.41 6.54 6.52 6.54 6.43 6.67 6.6
    Ha'il 4.23 4.27 4.29 5.31 5.47 5.47 5.59 5.14 5.62 5.72

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    This recommended data set is about the efficiency of the pure technical construction industry between 2013 and 2022 in the KSA. The proposed data was considered by Yu et al. [30], and its records can be reported in Table 7.

    Table 7.  The efficiency of the pure technical construction industry data set.
    Zone 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
    Eastern 2.55 3.90 4.59 6.37 7.11 7.38 7.55 7.17 7.89 8.54
    Al Madinah 3.26 3.46 3.47 4.99 6.38 6.42 6.81 6.16 6.77 7.21
    Asir 3.41 3.81 3.98 4.65 5.47 5.74 5.92 6.17 6.13 6.53
    Jizan 3.42 3.39 3.62 4.46 5.37 5.71 5.56 5.49 5.64 5.80
    Al-Qassim 3.43 3.45 3.37 4.11 4.46 4.81 5.10 5.07 5.24 5.45
    Tabuk 2.99 2.78 2.96 3.96 4.48 4.96 4.82 4.75 4.89 5.13
    Ha'il 2.89 2.59 2.73 3.59 4.19 4.59 4.52 4.50 4.70 4.75
    Al Jawf 2.29 2.75 2.48 3.35 4.22 4.42 4.55 4.44 4.63 4.71
    Najran 2.83 2.92 2.62 3.33 4.02 4.38 4.47 4.44 4.61 4.8
    Northern Borders 1.51 1.51 1.6 2.79 3.95 4.04 3.99 4.08 4.4 4.48

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Table (8) presents a statistical summary of the three data sets. Furthermore, Figure 5 shows several significant plots (scaled total time on test (TTT), quantile-quantile (Q-Q), and box plots) derived from the three industrial datasets. These plots help analyze the historical performance of the industrial sectors.

    Table 8.  Numerical values of descriptive statistics based on the three data sets.
    Data Q1 Q2 μ1 Q3 CV N M
    1 28.75 46.50 67.82 27.60 54.57 1.31 0.83
    2 6.55 7.72 7.67 9.35 0.35 -0.18 -0.96
    3 3.445 4.475 4.521 5.39 0.35 0.3589 -0.0846

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 5.  Various non-parametric plots of the suggested data sets.

    Additionally, we would like to select the more appropriate fitting model for the two proposed data sets. We consider several renowned competitive probability distributions to compare with the results of EF-IW, including the inverse Weibull (IW), error function Weibull (EF-W), error function exponential (EF-E), power Burr X (PBX), and generalized exponential (GE) models.

    Akaike information criterion (A), Bayesian information criterion (B), Hannan-Quin information criterion (C), correction Akaike information criterion (D), Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistics with its associated P-values are considered when comparing the model and recommending the best model. By calculating and comparing the proposed measures, we gain a clear understanding of the relative performance of each model. Models with the lowest values for these statistics will be considered for the best fit of the given data set. This approach reflects the strengths of the new distribution in terms of its suitability for different data structures and ensures that the model selection process takes into account both the complexity of the model and the goodness of fit across multiple aspects of the data distribution. Table (9) summarizes the final estimates of the unknown parameters with their corresponding log-likelihood (LL). Consequently, the recommended EF-IW model emerges as the most favorable distribution for modeling the three data sets. Henceforth, the empirical v.s. the fitted (PDF and CDF) plots for the proposed model with its competitors are generated and reported in Figures (6)(8) using the two data sets. These visual plots demonstrate that the EF-IW distribution works well with the three data sets.

    Table 9.  Parameter estimations with various statistic comparison measures for the three considered data sets.
    Data Model ˆθ ˆβ KS P-value LL A B C D
    EF-IW 10.609 0.5686 0.1425 0.6197 -144.601 293.202 295.866 294.016 293.682
    IW 8.5601 0.6934 0.2135 0.1557 -152.624 309.269 311.934 300.958 300.624
    1 EF-W 224.821 0.7022 0.1961 0.2316 -147.318 298.637 301.301 299.451 299.117
    EF-E 0.0047 0.3475 0.0023 -149.955 301.911 303.243 302.318 302.064
    PBX 0.0771 0.5983 0.1575 0.4901 -145.356 294.713 297.378 295.603 295.269
    GE 0.0188 1.4887 0.1495 0.5582 -145.041 294.082 296.746 294.897 294.562
    EF-IW 169.011 2.4633 0.1114 0.3500 -132.473 268.947 273.444 270.734 269.126
    IW 2168.36 4.0579 0.1697 0.0354 -146.885 297.771 302.268 299.557 297.950
    2 EF-W 10.415 3.6140 0.1468 0.0978 -132.736 269.472 273.969 271.259 269.651
    EF-E 0.0709 0.4251 <0.0001 -179.247 360.494 362.743 361.387 360.553
    PBX 0.0407 1.5378 0.2102 0.0041 -146.950 297.936 302.433 299.723 298.115
    GE 0.6226 69.883 0.1399 0.1290 -139.298 282.596 287.093 284.382 282.775
    EF-IW 11.193 1.5481 0.0756 0.6168 -177.432 358.864 364.074 360.973 358.988
    IW 25.075 2.5284 0.1395 0.0408 -198.317 400.634 405.845 402.743 400.758
    3 EF-W 1.9167 7.5766 0.1301 0.0676 -185.737 375.475 380.686 377.584 375.599
    EF-E 0.1131 0.3139 <0.0001 -210.347 422.694 425.300 423.749 422.735
    PBX 0.0639 1.7021 0.0909 0.3791 -177.673 359.347 364.557 361.455 359.470
    GE 0.7435 16.358 0.1060 0.2107 -180.239 364.478 69.688 366.587 364.602

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 6.  Fitted density and CDF for the fitting models to data set 1.
    Figure 7.  Fitted density and CDF for the fitting models to data set 2.
    Figure 8.  Fitted density and CDF for the fitting models to data set 3.

    Finally, the estimates of the model parameters using the Bayesian technique under several loss functions of the EF-IW distribution by applying the three data sets are computed and reported in Table (10). Also, Figures (9)(11) show the histogram and trace plots of MH results.

    Table 10.  Bayesian estimates under various loss functions for the EF-IW model using the three data sets.
    Data Par Bayes
    BSE BLI BGE
    1 θ 10.468 10.470 10.468
    β 0.5765 0.5766 0.5764
    2 θ 168.989 168.990 168.989
    β 2.457 2.457 2.457
    3 θ 11.692 11.689 11.694
    β 1.5635 1.5637 1.5634

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 9.  Histogram and trace plots applying MH technique for the first data set.
    Figure 10.  Histogram and trace plots applying MH technique for the second data set.
    Figure 11.  Histogram and trace plots applying MH technique for the third data set.

    This study introduces a new probability distribution, and its mathematical properties are thoroughly explored. The new model is named the error function inverse Weibull distribution. The model parameters are estimated using two different estimation methods, and extensive simulation studies are conducted to identify the most efficient estimation technique. To demonstrate the versatility and practical usefulness of the EF-IW distribution, the new distribution is applied to three datasets, demonstrating its ability to adapt to varied data properties. The findings of these applications show that the EF-IW distribution surpasses considered competitive probability distributions previously studied in the literature, giving more accurate and efficient outcomes in terms of fit and prediction. These findings show the novel distribution's potential as a robust tool for modeling data across several domains, providing a promising alternative to established models.

    Future work on the EF-IW distribution may include expanding modifications, estimation, and applications. Some potential directions include the following

    (1) New extended forms of the EF-IW distribution can be proposed, such as truncation, zero-inflation, and Neutrosophic extension for imprecise datasets.

    (2) The progressive censoring type may also be used to obtain the model parameter estimations.

    (3) Future studies should focus on the utilization of the EF-IW distribution to handle ranked set sampling data, which is frequently seen in survival and reliability analysis studies. Enhancing the distribution applicability and usefulness will require developing parameter estimation approaches for censored and uncensored data with a cure fraction.

    All authors contributed equally to this paper. Badr Aloraini and Abdulaziz S. Alghamdi did the writing and mathematics, Mohammad Zaid Alaskar and Maryam Ibrahim Habadi did the revising, editing, and validating.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This study is supported via funding from Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University project number (PSAU/2025/R/1446).

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.



    [1] L. P. Sapkota, V. Kumar, A. M. Gemeay, M. E. Bakr, O. S. Balogun, A. H. Muse, New Lomax-G family of distributions: Statistical properties and applications, AIP Adv., 13 (2023), 095128. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0171949 doi: 10.1063/5.0171949
    [2] M. M. Abdelwahab, A. B. Ghorbal, A. S. Hassan, M. Elgarhy, E. M. Almetwally, A. F. Hashem, Classical and Bayesian inference for the Kavya-Manoharan generalized exponential distribution under generalized progressively Hybrid censored data, Symmetry, 15 (2023), 1193. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym15061193 doi: 10.3390/sym15061193
    [3] A. A. M. Teamah, A. A. Elbanna, A. M. Gemeay, Heavy-tailed log-logistic distribution: properties, risk measures and applications, Stat. Optim. Inform. Comput., 9 (2021), 910–941, https://doi.org/10.19139/soic-2310-5070-1220 doi: 10.19139/soic-2310-5070-1220
    [4] M. A. Meraou, M. Z. Raqab, F. B. Almathkour, Analyzing insurance data with an alpha power transformed exponential Poisson model, Ann. Data Sci., 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40745-024-00554-z
    [5] E. Yıldırım, E. S. Ilıkkan, A. M. Gemeay, N. Makumi, M. E. Bakr, O. S. Balogun, Power unit Burr-XII distribution: Statistical inference with applications, AIP Adv., 13 (2023), 105107. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0171077 doi: 10.1063/5.0171077
    [6] M. A. Meraou, N. M. Al-Kandari, M. Z. Raqab, D. Kundu, Analysis of skewed data by using compound Poisson exponential distribution with applications to insurance claims, J. Stat. Comput. Sim., 92 (2022), 928–956. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2021.1981324 doi: 10.1080/00949655.2021.1981324
    [7] M. A. Almuqrin, A. M. Gemeay, M. M. A. El-Raouf, M. Kilai, R. Aldallal, E. Hussam, A flexible extension of reduced kies distribution: Properties, inference, and applications in biology, Complexity, 2022 (2022), 6078567. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6078567 doi: 10.1155/2022/6078567
    [8] M. A. Meraou, N. M. Al-Kandari, M. Z. Raqab, Univariate and bivariate compound models based on random sum of variates with application to the insurance losses data, J. Stat. Theory Pract., 16 (2022), 56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42519-022-00282-8 doi: 10.1007/s42519-022-00282-8
    [9] M. A.Meraou, M. Z. Raqab, D. Kundu, F. A. Alqallaf, Inference for compound truncated Poisson log-normal model with application to maximum precipitation data, Commun. Stat. Simul. C., 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2024.2328168
    [10] A. Z. Afify, A. M. Gemeay, N. M. Alfaer, G. M. Cordeiro, E. H. Hafez, Power-modified Kies-exponential distribution: Properties, classical and Bayesian inference with an application to engineering data, Entropy, 24 (2022), 883. https://doi.org/10.3390/e24070883 doi: 10.3390/e24070883
    [11] C. Kus, M. C. Korkmaz, I. Kinaci, K. Karakaya, Y. Akdogan, Modified-Lindley distribution and its applications to the real data, Commun. Fac. Sci. Univ., 71 (2022), 252–272. https://doi.org/10.31801/cfsuasmas.744141 doi: 10.31801/cfsuasmas.744141
    [12] Y. M. Gómez, D. I. Gallardo, B. C. Arnold, The power piecewise exponential model, J. Stat. Comput. Sim., 88 (2018), 825–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2017.1407935 doi: 10.1080/00949655.2017.1407935
    [13] G. P. Dhungana, V. Kumar, Exponentiated Odd Lomax exponential distribution with application to COVID-19 death cases of Nepal, PloS one, 17 (2022), e0269450. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269450 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269450
    [14] A. S. Hassan, R. E. Mohamd, M. Elgarhy, A. Fayomi, Alpha power transformed extended exponential distribution: properties and applications, J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl., 12 (2019), 239–251. https://doi.org/10.22436/jnsa.012.04.05 doi: 10.22436/jnsa.012.04.05
    [15] K. Karakaya, M. C. Korkmaz, C. Chesneau, G. G. Hamedani, A new alternative unit-lindley distribution with increasing failure rate, Sci. Iran., 2022. https://doi.org/10.24200/sci.2022.58409.5712
    [16] Y. L. Tung, Z. Ahmad, E. Mahmoudi, The arcsine-x family of distributions with applications to financial sciences, Comput. Syst. Sci. Eng., 39 (2021), 351–363. https://doi.org/10.32604/csse.2021.014270 doi: 10.32604/csse.2021.014270
    [17] L. M. Z. Fernándz, T. A. N. De Andrade, The erf-G family: new unconditioned and log-linear regression models, Chil. J. Stat., 11 (2020), 1.
    [18] K. K. Ajongba, S. Nasiru, A. A. Kobilla, A. G. Abubakari, Error function Burr XII distribution: Quantile regression, classical and Bayesian applications, J. Stat. Manag. Syst., 27 (2024), 1139–1168. https://doi.org/10.47974/JSMS-1216 doi: 10.47974/JSMS-1216
    [19] C. C. Caroline, T. A. N. De Andrade, C. Bisognin, New unconditional and quantile regression model Erf-weibull: An alternative to Gamma, Gumbel and exponentiated exponential distributions, Rev. Colomb. Estad. Appl. Stat., 47 (2024), 301–327, 2024. http://doi.org/10.15446/rce.v47n2.110213 doi: 10.15446/rce.v47n2.110213
    [20] O. Alzeley, E. M. Almetwally, A. M. Gemeay, H. M. Alshanbari, E. H. Hafez, M. H. Abu-Moussa, Statistical inference under censored data for the new exponential‐X Fréchet distribution: Simulation and application to Leukemia data, Comput. Intel. Neurosc., 2021 (2021), 2167670. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/2167670 doi: 10.1155/2021/2167670
    [21] E. Hussam, M. A. Sabry, M. M. Abd El-Raouf, E. M. Almetwally, Fuzzy vs. traditional reliability model for inverse Weibull distribution, Axioms, 12 (2023), 582. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12060582 doi: 10.3390/axioms12060582
    [22] A. Ahmad, A. A. Rather, Y. A. Tashkandy, M. E. Bakr, M. M. El-Din, A. M. Gemeay, et al., Deriving the new cotangent Fréchet distribution with real data analysis, Alex. Eng. J., 105 (2024), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2024.06.038 doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2024.06.038
    [23] A. A. Mohamed, R. M. Refaey, G. R. AL-Dayian, Bayesian and E-Bayesian estimation for odd generalized exponential inverted Weibull distribution, J. Bus. Environ. Sci., 3 (2024), 275–301.
    [24] Y. Y. Abdelall, A. S. Hassan, E. M. Almetwally, A new extension of the odd inverse Weibull-G family of distributions: Bayesian and non-Bayesian estimation with engineering applications, Comput. J. Math. Stat. Sci., 3 (2024), 359–388. https://doi.org/10.21608/cjmss.2024.285399.1050 doi: 10.21608/cjmss.2024.285399.1050
    [25] A. Al Mutairi, R. H. Khashab, E. M. Almetwally, O. E. Abo-Kasem, G. M. Ibrahim, Bayesian and non-Bayesian inference for inverse Weibull model based on jointly type-Ⅱ hybrid censoring samples with modeling to physics data, AIP Adv., 13 (2023), 105120. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0173273 doi: 10.1063/5.0173273
    [26] A. S. Hassan, A. E. L. Hagag, N. Metwally, O. H. Sery, Statistical analysis of inverse Weibull based on step-stress partially accelerated life tests with unified Hybrid censoring data, Comput. J. Math. Stat. Sci., 4 (2025), 162–185. https://doi.org/10.21608/cjmss.2024.319502.1072 doi: 10.21608/cjmss.2024.319502.1072
    [27] N. Alsadat, A. Ahmad, M. Jallal, A. M. Gemeay, M. A. Meraou, E. Hussam, et al., The novel Kumaraswamy power Frechet distribution with data analysis related to diverse scientific areas, Alex. Eng. J., 70 (2023), 651–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2023.03.003 doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2023.03.003
    [28] A. Xu, G. Fang, L. Zhuang, C. Gu, A multivariate student-t process model for dependent tail-weighted degradation data, IISE Trans., 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725854.2024.2389538
    [29] L. Zhuang, A. Xu, Y. Wang, Y. Tang, Remaining useful life prediction for two-phase degradation model based on reparameterized inverse Gaussian process, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 319 (2024), 877–890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2024.06.032 doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2024.06.032
    [30] H. Yu, Z. Shang, F. Wang, Analysis of the current situation of the construction industry in Saudi Arabia and the factors affecting it: An empirical study, Sustainability, 16 (2024), 6756. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16166756 doi: 10.3390/su16166756
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2025 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(363) PDF downloads(26) Cited by(0)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog