传统Shewhart-p控制图只对单一属性的不合格品率进行监控,在过程发生偏移时有一定的滞后性。为提高不合格品率控制图的精度,提出一种多元指数加权移动平均不合格品率(multivariate exponentially weighted moving average p, MEWMA-p)...传统Shewhart-p控制图只对单一属性的不合格品率进行监控,在过程发生偏移时有一定的滞后性。为提高不合格品率控制图的精度,提出一种多元指数加权移动平均不合格品率(multivariate exponentially weighted moving average p, MEWMA-p)控制图。该控制图将多个属性的不合格品率应用于多元指数加权移动平均控制图,可同时对多个属性进行监控,并且对于小范围的偏移更加敏感。对比分析同等偏移程度下指数加权移动平均不合格品率(exponentially weighted moving average p, EWMA-p)控制图与MEWMA-p控制图的平均运行长度(average run length,ARL)结果,并通过模拟仿真说明该方法的有效性。展开更多
针对最小均方误差(Minimum Mean Square Error,MMSE)受控过程联合监控可控输入与过程输出这一问题,在任意阶自回归AR(p)平稳扰动模型下开发了一种通用的联合控制图,并将界内点排列非随机判异规则引入其中.同时,对AR(p)平稳扰动模型下生...针对最小均方误差(Minimum Mean Square Error,MMSE)受控过程联合监控可控输入与过程输出这一问题,在任意阶自回归AR(p)平稳扰动模型下开发了一种通用的联合控制图,并将界内点排列非随机判异规则引入其中.同时,对AR(p)平稳扰动模型下生产过程的MMSE控制器和输入与输出的平均链长(Average Run Length,ARL)进行了推导.最后,通过仿真实验验证了该联合控制图的有效性.展开更多
Summary： We performed a retrospective, case-control study to evaluate whether the urine flow acceleration （UFA, mL/s2） is superior to maximum uroflow （Qmax, mL/s） in diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction （BOO） ...Summary： We performed a retrospective, case-control study to evaluate whether the urine flow acceleration （UFA, mL/s2） is superior to maximum uroflow （Qmax, mL/s） in diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction （BOO） in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia （BPH）. In this study, a total of 50 men with BPH （age： 58±12.5 years） and 50 controls （age： 59±13.0 years） were included. A pressure-flow study was used to determine the presence of BOO according to the recommendations of Incontinence Control Society （ICS）. The results showed that the UFA and Qmax in BPH group were much lower than those in the control group [（2.05±0.85） vs. （4.60±1.25） mL/s2 and （8.50±1.05） vs. （13.00±3.35） mL/s] （P〈0.001）. Accol;ding to the criteria （UFA〈2.05 mL/s2, Qmax〈10 mL/s）, the sensitivity and specificity of UFA vs. Qmax in diagnosing BOO were 88%, 75% vs. 81%, 63%. UFA vs. Omax, when compared with the results of P-Q chart （the kappa values in corresponding analysis）, was 0.55 vs. 0.35. The pros- tate volume, post void residual and detrusor pressure at Qmax between the two groups were 28.6±9.8 vs. 24.2±7.6 mL, 60.4±1.4 vs. 21.3±2.5 mL and 56.6±8.3 vs. 21.7±6.1 cmHzO, respectively （P〈0.05）. It was concluded that the UFA is a useful urodynamic parameter, and is superior to Qmax in diagnosing BOO in patients with BPH.展开更多
文摘传统Shewhart-p控制图只对单一属性的不合格品率进行监控,在过程发生偏移时有一定的滞后性。为提高不合格品率控制图的精度,提出一种多元指数加权移动平均不合格品率(multivariate exponentially weighted moving average p, MEWMA-p)控制图。该控制图将多个属性的不合格品率应用于多元指数加权移动平均控制图,可同时对多个属性进行监控,并且对于小范围的偏移更加敏感。对比分析同等偏移程度下指数加权移动平均不合格品率(exponentially weighted moving average p, EWMA-p)控制图与MEWMA-p控制图的平均运行长度(average run length,ARL)结果,并通过模拟仿真说明该方法的有效性。
文摘针对最小均方误差(Minimum Mean Square Error,MMSE)受控过程联合监控可控输入与过程输出这一问题,在任意阶自回归AR(p)平稳扰动模型下开发了一种通用的联合控制图,并将界内点排列非随机判异规则引入其中.同时,对AR(p)平稳扰动模型下生产过程的MMSE控制器和输入与输出的平均链长(Average Run Length,ARL)进行了推导.最后,通过仿真实验验证了该联合控制图的有效性.
文摘Summary： We performed a retrospective, case-control study to evaluate whether the urine flow acceleration （UFA, mL/s2） is superior to maximum uroflow （Qmax, mL/s） in diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction （BOO） in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia （BPH）. In this study, a total of 50 men with BPH （age： 58±12.5 years） and 50 controls （age： 59±13.0 years） were included. A pressure-flow study was used to determine the presence of BOO according to the recommendations of Incontinence Control Society （ICS）. The results showed that the UFA and Qmax in BPH group were much lower than those in the control group [（2.05±0.85） vs. （4.60±1.25） mL/s2 and （8.50±1.05） vs. （13.00±3.35） mL/s] （P〈0.001）. Accol;ding to the criteria （UFA〈2.05 mL/s2, Qmax〈10 mL/s）, the sensitivity and specificity of UFA vs. Qmax in diagnosing BOO were 88%, 75% vs. 81%, 63%. UFA vs. Omax, when compared with the results of P-Q chart （the kappa values in corresponding analysis）, was 0.55 vs. 0.35. The pros- tate volume, post void residual and detrusor pressure at Qmax between the two groups were 28.6±9.8 vs. 24.2±7.6 mL, 60.4±1.4 vs. 21.3±2.5 mL and 56.6±8.3 vs. 21.7±6.1 cmHzO, respectively （P〈0.05）. It was concluded that the UFA is a useful urodynamic parameter, and is superior to Qmax in diagnosing BOO in patients with BPH.
