Next Article in Journal
Semi-Supervised Building Detection from High-Resolution Remote Sensing Imagery
Previous Article in Journal
‘Should I Go or Should I Stay?’ Why Do Romanians Choose the Bulgarian Seaside for Their Summer Holiday?
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Non-Linear Relationship between Air Pollution, Labor Insurance and Productivity: Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines Approach
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A New EWMA Control Chart for Monitoring Multinomial Proportions

1
Department of Statistics, National Chengchi University, Taipei 116, Taiwan
2
School of Big Data & Artificial Intelligence, Fujian Polytechnic Normal University, Fuqing 350300, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(15), 11797; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511797
Submission received: 5 June 2023 / Revised: 12 July 2023 / Accepted: 17 July 2023 / Published: 31 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Statistical Process Control in Sustainable Industries)

Abstract

:
Control charts have been widely used for monitoring process quality in manufacturing and have played an important role in triggering a signal in time when detecting a change in process quality. Many control charts in literature assume that the in-control distribution of the univariate or multivariate process data is continuous. This research develops two exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA) proportion control charts to monitor a process with multinomial proportions under large and small sample sizes, respectively. For a large sample size, the charting statistic depends on the well-known Pearson’s chi-square statistic, and the control limit of the EWMA proportion chart is determined by an asymptotical chi-square distribution. For a small sample size, we derive the exact mean and variance of the Pearson s chi-square statistic. Hence, the exact EWMA proportion chart is determined. The proportion chart can also be applied to monitor the distribution-free continuous multivariate process as long as each categorical proportion associated with specification limits of each quality variable is known or estimated. Lastly, we examine simulation studies and real data analysis to conduct the detection performance of the proposed EWMA proportion chart.

1. Introduction

Process control plays a critical role in fostering sustainable practices within industries. It establishes a connection and enables the attainment of secure and efficient process operation and energy systems. Sustainability encompasses the integration of economic, social, and environmental systems, necessitating a well-rounded approach to resource management [1,2,3]. From the standpoint of process control, several factors contribute to sustainable practices, including the minimization of raw material costs, reduction of product and material scrap/waste expenses, optimization of capital costs, enhancement of process and energy efficiency, mitigation of carbon and water footprints, and maximization of eco-efficiency and process safety. Therefore, process control plays a pivotal role in offering sustainability solutions for developing and implementing efficient technology (refer to Daoutidis et al. [4]). In other words, the practice of sustainability introduces new operational challenges in the development of process control methods. So far, few papers have discussed developing or utilizing control charts to offer sustainability solutions. For example, Anderson et al. [5] applied multivariate control charts to monitor ecological and environmental measurement indices; Morrison [6] used control charts to interpret and monitor environmental data; Gove et al. [7] adopted control charts to catch water supply in south–west Western Australia; Oliveira da Silva et al. [8] constructed control charts to help in stability and reliability of water quality; Shafqat et al. [9] provided triple EWMA mean control chart to monitor and compare Air and Green House Gases Emissions of various countries and identified the critical countries. Control charts serve as effective tools in process control, aiming to enhance the quality and yield of products/parts while reducing scrap/waste of raw materials, minimizing carbon and water footprints, and increasing profits/eco-efficiency and energy efficiency of products.
Among statistical process control tools, control charts are effective tools for monitoring and improving the manufacturing or service process quality. Compared to many process controls with continuous quality variables, less attention has been paid to control charts designed with categorical quality characteristic. The well-known charts for monitoring two-categorical process units are p , c , n p , and u charts for monitoring nonconforming fraction and defects and for more details refer to Montgomery [10], Reynolds et al. [11,12] and Qiu [13]. However, only considering two categories is not enough to characterize the more general situation of process control. For example, an item can be classified into the three grades of best, better, or good and not just nonconforming and conforming grades. Consequently, the study of process control for categorical data following a multinomial distribution is required to explore carefully.
Up until now, many control charts monitoring multinomial-proportion process are constructed based on Pearson’s chi-square statistic, but its variant heavily depends on a large sample size (e.g., Marcucci [14] and Nelson et al. [15]). The asymptotic chi-square distribution of Pearson’s chi-square statistic is specifically known for an infinite sample size. When the sample size is small, it is not appropriate to adopt the asymptotic chi-square distribution of Pearson’s chi-square statistic to construct the multinomial-proportion control chart because the calculated average run length (ARL) of the asymptotic control charts may seriously deviate from the pre-specified ARL. It thus leads to an over- or under-adjustment of the process.
We note that many papers of multinomial-proportion control charts are designed based on the asymptotic distribution of Pearson’s chi-square statistic even when the sample size is small, such as Crosier [16] and Qiu [17]. Moreover, Ryan et al. [18] established the multinomial-proportion CUSUM chart that relies on pre-specified out-of-control multinomial proportions, which consequently leads to worse detection performance compared with multiple one-sided Bernoulli CUSUM charts. Li et al. [19] followed the idea of Qiu [17] to propose an EWMA-type control chart for monitoring the proportions of a multivariate binomial distribution under a large sample size. Huang et al. [20,21] and Lee et al. [22] extended the control chart in Li et al. [19] to monitor the multinomial-proportion process with a large sample size.
From those existing methods, we find that monitoring the multinomial-proportion process with a small sample size has not been discussed. Though the exact distribution of Pearson’s chi-square statistic is difficult to know, we may derive its exact mean and variance whether the sample size is small or large. According to the results, we thus provide an exact EWMA-proportion control chart to monitor the multinomial-proportion process. The control limit of the proposed exact control chart can be determined and implemented not only for a small sample size but also for a large sample size and even an individual sample. So far, the literature has not yet discussed the exact EWMA-proportion control chart.
In this study, we have devised a novel, efficient, and accurate method for monitoring and controlling a multinomial-proportion process. The proposed method holds the potential to provide multiple sustainability solutions across industries.
This rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 derives the exact means and variances of Pearson’s chi-square statistic under in-control process proportions and studies the properties of Pearson’s chi-square statistic. Section 3 constructs the exact and asymptotic EWMA-proportion charts and determine their control limits by satisfying the pre-specified ARL0 and considering small and large sample sizes. Section 4 evaluates and compares the out-of-control proportions’ detection performance of the proposed exact and asymptotic EWMA-proportion charts. Section 5 shows how the proposed exact EWMA-proportion chart can be applied to monitor the identify proportions of all categories of a distribution-free continuous multivariate process using a real example of semiconductor data obtained from UCI database. Finally, we offer conclusions of the study.

2. Investigation of the Property of Pearson’s Chi-Square Statistic for Correlated Quality Variables following a Multinomial Distribution

We first denote X = (X1, X2, …, Xm) as the count vector of m categories in n independent trials, where Xi is the count number of the ith category, i = 1, 2,…, m. Let p0 = (p0,1, p0,2, …, p0,m) be a vector of the in-control proportion associated with X = (X1, X2, …, Xm), where p0, i, i = 1, …, m, is the in-control proportion of the i -th category, and i = 1 m p 0 , i = 1 . Next,
  • X follows a multinomial distribution with probability mass function
    p ( X 1 = x 1 , X 2 = x 2 , , X m = x m ) = n ! x 1 ! x 2 ! x m ! p 0 , 1 x 1 p 0 , 2 x 2 p 0 , m x m ,
    where i = 1 m x i = n , and xi is the realization value of Xi for i = 1, …, m.
To know whether there is a change in the in-control proportion vector p0, a natural idea is to adopt the Pearson’s chi-square statistic to make a test. The in-control Pearson’s chi-square statistic:
χ 2 = i = 1 m ( X i e 0 , i ) 2 e 0 , i ,
where e 0 , i = n p 0 , i is the in control expected number of the i th category.
We now study the in-control distribution of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic and derive its exact mean and variance by considering various sample size and in-control proportion vector. When n is large enough, the Pearson’s chi-square statistic χ 2 follows an asymptotical chi-square distribution with degree of freedom (df) m − 1; that is, χ 2 ~ χ 2 ( m 1 ) . This is a well-known asymptotical distribution. When n is small, the distribution of Pearson’s chi-square statistic does not follow the χ 2 ( m 1 ) distribution. Hence, it is better to know the distribution of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic for a small sample size. However, it is impossible to know the exact distribution of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic, but we may derive its exact mean and variance as follows.
First, it is easy to derive the in-control mean of Pearson’s chi-square statistics χ 2 given the in-control proportion as follows.
E ( χ 2 ) = i = 1 m p 0 , i ( 1 p 0 , i ) p 0 , i = i = 1 m ( 1 p 0 , i ) = m 1
As per our best knowledge, the variance of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic has not been derived. We derive the in-control exact variance of Pearson’s chi-square statistic χ 2 as follows.
V a r ( χ 2 ) = i = 1 m 1 n p 0 , i m 2 + 2 m 2 n + 2 ( m 1 )
The Appendix A presents the derivation process. From (3), we find the variance value differs along with sample size n given m and p0, that is, the variance value is not fixed for various n.
To investigate how the mean and variance change under different n and in-control proportion vectors, without loss of generality, we consider two scenarios of in-control proportion vectors. In practice, the proportions could be all the same or not. It is the reason that we consider the proportion vector with the two scenarios. The two scenarios of in-control proportion vectors, each with four proportions for four categories are as follows.
Scenario (1): The in-control four proportions are the same,
p 0 = ( 0.25 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ) .
Scenario (2): The in-control four proportions are not all the same,
p 0 = ( 0.1 ,   0.1 ,   0.4 ,   0.4 ) .
Table 1 shows the calculated exact means and variances under different n and two scenarios of in-control proportion vectors. We find the following results in Table 1:
(i)
Under scenario (1), the exact means are all fixed at 3 whether n is small or large. However, the exact variance increases when n increases but converges to 5.999 when n is equal to 6000.
(ii)
Under scenario (2), the exact mean are all fixed at 3 whether n is small or large. However, the exact variance decreases when n increases but converges to 6.0 when n is equal to 6000.
(iii)
The exact variance increases or decreases heavily due to the in-control proportion vector. We can see that the change behavior of the exact variance for increasing n is different in scenarios (1) and (2).
The above results present clear evidence and show that the variance of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic is not fixed for a small sample size. However, the variance converges to 2(m − 1) when the sample size is large enough.
Table 1. The exact mean and variance of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic for various n under scenarios (1) and (2) with in-control proportion vectors.
Table 1. The exact mean and variance of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic for various n under scenarios (1) and (2) with in-control proportion vectors.
nScenario (1)Scenario (2)
E ( χ 2 ) V a r ( χ 2 ) E ( χ 2 ) V a r ( χ 2 )
13.0000.0003.0009.000
23.0003.0003.0007.500
33.0004.0003.0007.000
43.0004.5003.0006.750
53.0004.8003.0006.600
63.0005.0003.0006.500
73.0005.1433.0006.429
83.0005.2503.0006.375
93.0005.3333.0006.333
103.0005.4003.0006.300
113.0005.4553.0006.273
123.0005.5003.0006.250
133.0005.5383.0006.231
143.0005.5713.0006.214
153.0005.6003.0006.200
163.0005.6253.0006.188
173.0005.6473.0006.176
183.0005.6673.0006.167
193.0005.6843.0006.158
203.0005.7003.0006.150
503.0005.8803.0006.060
1003.0005.9403.0006.030
2003.0005.9703.0006.015
4003.0005.9853.0006.008
6003.0005.9903.0006.005
8003.0005.9933.0006.004
10003.0005.9943.0006.003
20003.0005.9973.0006.002
40003.0005.9993.0006.001
50003.0005.9993.0006.000
60003.0005.9993.0006.000
From Table 1, we can construct the exact EWMA-proportion control chart whether n is small or large.

3. A Pearson’s Chi-Square ( χ 2 ) Statistic-Based EWMA Chart for Monitoring the Multinomial Proportions

In statistical process control, sample size is usually small and not large. When n is not large enough, the distribution of Pearson’s chi-square statistic does not follow the well-known χ 2 ( m 1 ) distribution. The resulting variances of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic for various n in Section 2 exhibit this situation. Hence, it is not appropriate to adopt the χ 2 ( m 1 ) distribution to construct the EWMA- χ 2 control chart so as to monitor the multinomial-proportion process. The misuse of the EWMA- χ 2 control chart results in worse out-of-control detection performance.
We are able to derive the exact mean and variance of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic whether the sample size is small or not in Section 2, although it is impossible to know the distribution of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic. Based on (2) and (3), we may construct the exact EWMA-proportion control chart to monitor the changes in proportion vector of the multinomial quality variables for a small sample size. When sample size n is large enough, the in-control Pearson’s chi-square statistic is approximately distributed as χ 2 ( m 1 ) distribution with df m − 1. Thus, the monitoring statistic is independent of the original multinomial distribution and sample size n. Hence, we construct the asymptotic EWMA-proportion control chart. The detection performance of the two proposed EWMA-proportion control charts is then compared.

3.1. The Exact Multinomial-Proportion Control Chart

With the derived exact mean and variance of the in-control Pearson’s chi-square statistic, we may construct an exact EWMA-proportion control chart with the upper control limit (UCL), center line (CL), and lower control limit (LCL) as follows; see (5), for various sample size. In other words, the EWMA-proportion control chart has the control limit depending the value of n given the m categories. Here, we let LCL be zero since the out-of-control proportion vector leads to an increase in the value of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic.
We let the EWMA chart with monitoring statistic E W M A χ t 2 at time t be the weighted average of the Pearson’s chi-square statistic χ 2 at time t:
E W M A χ t 2 = λ χ t 2 + ( 1 λ ) E W M A χ t 1 2 ,   t = 1 , 2 , ,
where λ ( 0 , 1 ) is a smooth parameter.
The in-control mean and variance of monitoring statistic E W M A χ t 2 at time t are E ( E W M A χ t 2 ) = m 1 , and V a r ( E W M A χ t 2 ) = i = 1 m 1 n p 0 i m 2 + 2 m 2 n + 2 ( m 1 ) λ ( 1 ( 1 λ ) 2 t ) / ( 2 λ ) , respectively.
We let E W M A χ t = 0 2 = m − 1.
The control limits of the exact EWMA-proportion control chart are consequently:
U C L t = m 1 + L n i = 1 m 1 n p 0 i m 2 + 2 m 2 n + 2 ( m 1 ) λ ( 1 ( 1 λ ) 2 t ) / ( 2 λ ) , C L t = m 1 , L C L t = 0 ,
where the coefficient Ln should be chosen to satisfy the specified ARL0.
To determine Ln satisfying a specified ARL0, we use the Monte Carlo method and follow Yang et al. [23]. The Monte Carlo procedure using R program language is applied to calculate Ln, by satisfying a specified ARL0 (see Appendix B, Algorithm A1).
Based on the Monte Carlo procedure, Table 2 lists the resulting Ln of the exact EWMA-proportion control charts with specified ARL0 = 370.4 for various combinations of setting n and λ under the aforementioned two scenarios with in-control proportion vectors. We find that the Ln value increases slowly as n increases and converges to 2.416 or 2.417 when n is equal to 6000 under scenario (1) or (2).

3.2. The Asymptotic Multinomial-Proportion Control Chart

When n is large enough, the Pearson’s chi-square statistic χ 2 follows an asymptotical chi-square distribution with df m − 1 for an in-control process, that is, χ 2 ~ χ 2 ( m 1 ) with mean m − 1 and variance 2(m − 1). Thus, the monitoring statistic is independent of the original multinomial distribution and sample size n.
Based on the in-control asymptotical chi-square distribution, we may establish an EWMA multinomial-proportion control chart to monitor whether the proportion vector changes or not.
We let the EWMA chart with monitoring statistic E W M A χ t 2 at time t be
E W M A χ t 2 = λ χ t 2 + ( 1 λ ) E W M A χ t 1 2 ,   t = 1 , 2 , ,
where E W M A χ 0 2 = E ( χ 2 ) = m − 1, and λ ( 0 , 1 ) is a smooth parameter.
The mean and variance of monitoring statistic E W M A χ t 2 at time t are E ( E W M A χ t 2 ) = m 1 and V a r ( E W M A χ t 2 ) = 2 ( m 1 ) λ ( 1 ( 1 λ ) 2 t ) / ( 2 λ ) , respectively. We may find that the mean and variance of the monitoring statistic E W M A χ t 2 are independent on n.
Hence, the dynamic control limits of the EWMA- χ 2 control chart are constructed as
U C L t = m 1 + L 2 ( m 1 ) λ ( 1 ( 1 λ ) 2 t ) / ( 2 λ ) , C L t = m 1 , L C L t = 0 ,
where L is a coefficient of UCL and should be chosen to achieve a specified ARL0.
To determine L satisfying a specified ARL0, we refer to the Markov chain method in Lucas and Saccucci [24] or Chandrasekaran et al. [25]. We describe the ARL0 calculation procedure as follows.
Step 1. For a given L , at time t , the region ( 0 , U C L t ] is partitioned into k (e.g., k = 101 ) subsets or   state   A i   ,   i = 1 , 2 , , k , where A i = ( U C L t ( i 1 ) / k ,   U C L t ( i ) / k ] .
Step 2. Denote the transition probability matrix with transition probabilities p i , j t , from state A i to state A j at time t , as B t = ( p i , j t ) k × k , t 2 , where
p i , j t = p ( χ 2 ( m 1 ) ( U C L t ( j ) / k ( 1 λ ) U C L t 1 ( i 0.5 ) / k ) / λ )
p ( χ 2 ( m 1 ) ( U C L t ( j 1 ) / k ( 1 λ ) U C L t 1 ( i 0.5 ) / k ) / λ ) .
For t = 1 ,
p i , j 1 = p ( χ 2 ( m 1 ) ( U C L 1 ( j ) / k ( 1 λ ) U C L 1 ( i 0.5 ) / k ) / λ )
p ( χ 2 ( m 1 ) ( U C L 1 ( j 1 ) / k ( 1 λ ) U C L 1 ( i 0.5 ) / k ) / λ ) .
Step 3. A R L 0 ( L ) = p T ( Q 1 + 2 B 1 Q 2 + 3 B 1 B 2 Q 3 + + n B 1 B 2 B 3 B n 1 Q n + ) , where Q t = ( I k B t ) 1 , 1 is a column vector of ones, and the initial state probability is
p = ( 0 , , 1 , , 0 ) T .
To obtain the coefficient of the UCL, L , of the asymptotical control chart we next adopt the bisection algorithm. The calculation procedure is described as follows.
Step 1. For a given in-control A R L 0 , consider an interval [ L 1 , L 2 ] of L such that
A R L 0 ( L 1 ) < A R L 0 < A R L 0 ( L 2 ) , and a threshold error ε > 0 (e.g., ε = 0.5 ),
  • where A R L 0 ( L 1 ) and A R L 0 ( L 2 ) are computed by the above-mentioned procedure.
Step 2. Let L m i d d l e = ( L 1 + L 2 ) / 2 .
Step 3. If ( A R L 0 ( L m i d d l e ) A R L 0 ) ( A R L 0 ( L 1 ) A R L 0 ) 0 , then
L 2 = L m i d d l e , else L 1 = L m i d d l e .
Step 4. Repeat step 2 and step 3 until | A R L 0 ( L m i d d l e ) A R L 0 | ε .
Hence, L = L m i d d l e .
Based on the Markov chain method and bisection algorithm described above, the calculated coefficient (L) of the UCL with specified ARL0 = 370.4 under scenario (1) or (2) is 2.416. The result is obvious since L is a fixed value and independent of sample size n.

3.3. Comparison of the Exact and Asymptotic Multinomial-Proportion Control Charts

The resulting L and L n of the exact and asymptotic EWMA-proportion control charts for the two scenarios show that Ln converges to L (=2.416) when n ( 6000) is large enough. However, when n is not large enough, estimated Ln and L exhibit obvious difference. This is evidence that it is incorrect to adopt the asymptotic EWMA-proportion control chart to monitor the multinomial proportion vector when n is small or not large enough. Hence, the exact EWMA-proportion control chart is recommended for small and not large enough n.

4. Detection Performance Measurement of the Proposed Exact and Asymptotic EWMA-Proportion Control Charts

Without loss of generality, to measure the out-of-control detection performance of the proposed exact and asymptotic EWMA-proportion charts, we consider the following two scenarios with six out-of-control proportion vectors for setting n = 2(1)20, 50, 100(100), λ = 0.05 , and ARL0 = 370.
Scenario (1) has in-control proportion vector, p 0 = ( 0.25 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ) , and six out-of-control proportion vectors as follows. The six out-of-control proportion vectors:
p 1 = ( 0.2 ,   0.3 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ) , p 2 = ( 0.1 ,   0.4 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ) ,   p 3 = ( 0.05 ,   0.45 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ) ,   p 4 = ( 0.2 ,   0.2 ,   0.35 ,   0.25 ) ,   p 5 = ( 0.1 ,   0.1 ,   0.55 ,   0.25 ) , and p 6 = ( 0.05 , 0.05 , 0.65 , 0.25 ) .
Scenario (2) with in-control proportion vector, p 0 = ( 0.1 , 0.1 , 0.4 , 0.4 ) , and six out-of-control proportion vectors run as follows. The six out-of-control proportion vectors:
p 1 = ( 0.15 ,   0.05 ,   0.4 ,   0.4 ) , p 2 = ( 0.2 ,   0 ,   0.4 ,   0.4 ) ,   p 3 = ( 0.25 ,   0.25 ,   0.1 ,   0.4 ) , p 4 = ( 0.2 ,   0.2 ,   0.35 ,   0.25 ) , p 5 = ( 0.15 ,   0.15 ,   0.3 ,   0.4 ) , and p 6 = ( 0.25 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ,   0.25 ) .

4.1. Detection Performance of the Proposed Exact EWMA-Proportion Chart

Applying the calculated control limit coefficient, L n , of the proposed exact chart and the given scenarios (1) and (2) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors and sample size, we can calculate out-of-control average run length (ARL1). The Monte Carlo procedure is also applied to calculate ARL1 using R program language, see Appendix C (Algorithm A2). A smaller ARL1 indicates better detection performance of a control chart. ARL1 is always a popular detection performance index in the study of statistical process control.
The resulting Table 3 and Table 4 illustrate the calculated ARL1 (first row) and SDRL (standard deviation of run length; second row) of the proposed exact chart for various n and scenarios (1) and (2), respectively. We find the following results in Table 3 and Table 4:
(i)
For detecting any out-of-control proportion vector, ARL1 decreases when n increases;
(ii)
The larger the difference is between p0 and pi, the smaller is ARL1 under each n. The result is reasonable.
Table 3. ARLs of the proposed exact control chart for various n under scenario (1) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
Table 3. ARLs of the proposed exact control chart for various n under scenario (1) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
n p 0 p 1 p 2 p 3 p 4 p 5 p 6
2369.956
402.099
321.682
351.861
121.808
130.346
65.69
69.036
243.704
264.746
32.476
32.604
13.582
12.771
3372.065
416.056
287.588
323.047
69.136
75.999
32.504
34.156
183.376
205.704
14.306
15.077
5.923
5.942
4369.232
393.303
261.716
278.589
47.220
47.005
21.347
19.678
144.940
153.794
9.817
8.761
4.451
3.444
5370.177
405.620
238.209
263.725
32.446
33.244
14.187
13.570
114.307
125.545
6.370
6.160
2.813
2.369
6368.793
394.082
218.664
232.241
25.131
23.899
11.102
9.574
95.834
100.353
5.307
4.421
2.577
1.693
7374.458
398.754
203.780
217.250
20.065
18.688
8.840
7.366
81.281
84.604
4.339
3.463
2.127
1.325
8369.532
399.416
185.235
197.368
16.036
14.924
6.974
5.832
67.638
70.737
3.475
2.815
1.737
1.051
9367.247
395.453
170.07
184.802
13.245
12.332
5.749
4.824
57.690
60.603
2.899
2.343
1.487
0.846
10370.275
396.203
158.746
167.584
11.551
10.170
5.181
3.947
50.98
52.264
2.762
1.965
1.509
0.754
11370.450
400.534
146.869
157.557
9.862
8.811
4.438
3.391
44.622
45.979
2.359
1.715
1.350
0.635
12368.108
398.165
135.948
146.166
8.451
7.626
3.764
2.968
39.605
41.012
2.106
1.503
1.215
0.504
13370.740
398.013
127.254
134.882
7.674
6.678
3.482
2.524
35.619
36.202
1.973
1.331
1.195
0.461
14369.888
396.682
119.230
125.792
6.936
5.874
3.178
2.246
32.176
32.313
1.887
1.183
1.170
0.418
15371.409
399.734
110.564
117.402
6.162
5.318
2.785
2.025
29.037
29.353
1.697
1.058
1.110
0.341
16368.316
396.150
103.902
110.434
5.658
4.771
2.643
1.791
26.366
26.366
1.619
0.957
1.086
0.300
17372.261
398.352
97.635
102.595
5.250
4.308
2.476
1.609
24.342
24.132
1.557
0.875
1.074
0.274
18368.650
397.644
92.060
97.515
4.764
3.962
2.225
1.466
22.313
22.202
1.458
0.801
1.050
0.225
19369.787
396.360
86.608
91.298
4.394
3.594
2.102
1.345
20.668
20.551
1.402
0.726
1.035
0.189
20368.262
395.554
81.618
85.676
4.127
3.323
2.004
1.236
19.156
18.807
1.359
0.675
1.030
0.173
50370.723
398.263
24.540
24.130
1.476
0.778
1.045
0.211
5.338
4.713
1.008
0.675
1.000
0.001
100370.097
398.439
9.079
8.360
1.041
0.203
1.000
0.009
2.309
1.678
1.000
0.002
1.000
0.000
200371.126
400.019
3.564
2.916
1.000
0.011
1.000
0.000
1.286
0.587
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
400369.493
398.541
1.692
1.028
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.021
0.143
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
600370.632
398.363
1.256
0.542
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.001
0.033
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
800369.187
397.229
1.101
0.324
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.007
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1000369.751
398.334
1.038
0.196
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.001
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
2000369.708
398.510
1.000
0.013
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
4000369.557
397.351
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
5000369.657
398.279
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
6000369.736
398.101
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
Table 4. ARLs of the proposed exact control chart for various n under scenario (2) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
Table 4. ARLs of the proposed exact control chart for various n under scenario (2) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
n p 0 p 1 p 2 p 3 p 4 p 5 p 6
1369.314
395.079
371.081
394.476
370.828
394.501
9.320
7.951
17.190
15.914
45.580
45.433
9.318
7.973
2368.283
400.411
258.404
283.917
123.075
138.227
7.802
6.934
15.158
14.770
42.878
44.518
8.120
7.384
3369.013
405.564
207.565
229.870
74.424
83.969
4.972
4.754
11.054
11.299
34.678
36.799
5.396
5.359
4368.840
390.956
173.702
185.024
51.568
54.552
4.441
3.391
9.838
9.003
31.085
30.668
4.930
4.078
5370.999
395.305
144.832
157.049
36.937
38.928
3.570
2.746
8.096
7.597
26.724
26.895
3.966
3.395
6370.222
398.943
123.071
133.663
27.592
28.795
2.904
2.217
6.842
6.532
23.593
23.916
3.302
2.841
7368.671
398.112
107.071
114.893
21.611
22.220
2.494
1.823
6.081
5.613
21.262
21.481
2.970
2.394
8370.126
395.952
93.134
99.214
17.970
17.581
2.167
1.546
5.363
4.940
19.289
19.300
2.592
2.081
9370.868
396.084
81.428
86.310
14.823
14.296
2.029
1.318
4.915
4.388
17.743
17.596
2.446
1.829
10369.120
398.684
71.317
76.376
12.402
11.947
1.789
1.151
4.354
3.959
16.071
16.203
2.139
1.630
11370.757
398.200
63.001
67.485
10.537
10.107
1.671
1.004
4.013
3.569
14.954
14.947
2.026
1.454
12368.926
396.388
57.180
59.868
9.521
8.605
1.595
0.889
3.802
3.222
14.066
13.791
1.960
1.306
13371.755
398.458
51.611
53.654
8.408
7.491
1.449
0.792
3.475
2.966
12.980
12.832
1.782
1.190
14369.361
398.027
46.467
48.400
7.471
6.571
1.406
0.715
3.292
2.725
12.146
11.953
1.741
1.096
15366.476
398.999
42.014
43.662
6.654
5.823
1.331
0.641
3.002
2.526
11.312
11.217
1.599
0.998
16369.623
398.93
38.371
39.606
5.875
1.197
1.268
0.57
2.852
2.342
10.702
10.512
1.536
0.915
17372.149
397.024
35.721
36.112
5.585
4.611
1.249
0.531
2.783
2.171
10.282
9.860
1.537
0.862
18369.494
397.07
32.851
33.070
5.151
4.163
1.215
0.486
2.634
2.03
9.769
9.296
1.461
0.794
19369.044
398.317
30.160
30.550
4.714
3.802
1.185
0.442
2.441
1.907
9.156
8.822
1.369
0.726
20369.159
399.616
27.988
28.106
4.392
3.473
1.159
0.410
2.365
1.797
8.657
8.356
1.365
0.690
50370.314
397.494
7.236
6.396
1.420
0.618
1.000
0.025
1.242
0.532
3.407
2.825
1.019
0.136
100369.737
398.007
2.819
2.120
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.018
0.135
1.757
1.119
1.000
0.007
200369.376
397.284
1.405
0.709
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.007
1.141
0.391
1.000
0.000
400370.64
399.136
1.031
0.170
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.005
0.069
1.000
0.000
600370.225
398.276
1.002
0.041
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.009
1.000
0.000
800370.060
397.990
1.000
0.008
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.001
1.000
0.000
1000369.657
398.683
1.000
0.001
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
2000370.317
398.111
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
4000370.794
399.123
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
5000370.790
399.038
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
6000369.862
398.246
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000

4.2. Detection Performance of the Asymptotic EWMA-Proportion Chart

Applying the calculated control limit coefficient, L, of the asymptotic chart and the given scenarios (1) and (2) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors, we can calculate ARL1.
The resulting Table 5 (scenario (1)) and Table 6 (scenario (2)) illustrate the calculated ARL1 (first row) and SDRL (second row) of the asymptotic chart, respectively.
We find the following results in Table 5 and Table 6:
(i)
Most ARL0s are far away from the specified 370.4 for small n. In Table 5, we find many ARL0s are larger than the specified 370.4 for n < 400, and some ARL1s are larger than the specified 370.4 for very small n. However, in Table 6, we find all ARL0s are smaller than the specified 370.4 for n < 6000. These results indicate that the proposed asymptotic control chart is not in-control robust, it becomes ARL biased, and its detection performance is worse for small n.
(ii)
When n is large (n  400 for scenario (1) or n = 6000 for scenario (2)), the calculated ARL0 close to the specified ARL0, and ARL1 decreases when n increases for detecting any out-of-control proportion vector.
(iii)
The larger the difference is between p0 and pi, i = 1, 2, …, 6, the smaller is ARL1 under each n.
All those phenomena indicate the asymptotic control chart should be adopted in process control by taking n  400 or 6000 in scenario (1) or (2) for the correcting control process; otherwise, the detection performance of the asymptotic control chart would be worse and result in an incorrect process adjustment.
Compared with the resulting Table 3, Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6, we find that the two charts do have almost the same in-control and out-of-control process control performances for n 6000. However, the exact EWMA-proportion chart offers correct results compared to the asymptotic control chart, especially for small n. Hence, the proposed exact EWMA-proportion chart is recommended whether the sample size is small or not.

5. Monitoring Under-Specification Proportions of a Continuous Multivariate Process Using the Proposed EWMA-Proportion Chart and Its Application

The proposed exact EWMA-proportion chart can not only be applied to monitor the proportion vector of a multinomial process but also the proportion vector of multiple categories in a distribution-free or an unknown distributed continuous multivariate process.
In this section, we provide an example to describe how to apply our proposed exact chart to monitor the proportion vector of four categories in a distribution-free or an unknown distributed continuous bivariate process. We adopt a semiconductor manufacturing data-set that can be found in a data depository maintained by the University of California, Irvine (McCann and Johnston [26]). The data-set spans from July 2008 to October 2008 and contains 591 continuous quality variables. Each variable has 1567 observations, including 1463 in-control observations and 104 out-of-control observations.
To demonstrate the detection performance of the proposed exact chart, we select 2 of the 591 continuous correlated quality variables, X = (X3, X12)T. Based on the respective specifications of X3 and X12, they can be classified into four categories. The four categories: (1) X3 and X12 are all under specifications, (2) X3 is under specification, but X12 is not, (3) X3 and X12 are all out of specifications, and (4) X3 is out of specification, but X12 is under specification. By examining the 1463 in-control population observations, we classify their categories and obtain the proportion vector of the four categories as p0 = (0.4, 0.08, 0.07, 0.45). For the 104 out-of-control population observations, the proportion vector of the four categories is p1 = (0.00, 0.00, 0.2167, 0.7833). To demonstrate the detection performance of the proposed exact chart, we take the first 100 in-control observations and the first 60 out-of-control observations, respectively. We let the sample size be five, then there are 20 in-control samples and 12 out-of-control samples. To monitor the process proportion vector, we construct the exact control chart applying the aforementioned method.
From (5), we know that the control limit of the proposed exact control chart is variable when sampling time changes. Hence, for each sampling time t, we list U C L t , the number of observations in each category (nij), the in-control statistic value ( χ t 2 ), and charting statistic value ( E W M A χ t 2 ) for the 20 in-control subgroup data. The results are illustrated in Table 7. We then plot the in-control E W M A χ t 2 values in the constructed exact control chart; see Figure 1. We find all E W M A χ t 2 values fall within U C L t demonstrating that the first 20 samples are all from the population with the in-control proportion vector. Furthermore, we calculate nij, the out-of-control statistic value ( χ t 2 ), and charting statistic value ( E W M A χ t 2 ) using the 12 out-of-control subgroup data. The results appear in Table 8. We display the out-of-control E W M A χ t 2 values in the constructed exact control chart in Figure 2. We find that the first E W M A χ t 2 value falls outside of U C L t , and ten out of the twelve E W M A χ t 2 values create signals. It demonstrates that the proposed exact control chart performs well in detecting the out-of-control proportion vector.

6. Conclusions

This paper develops the exact and asymptotic EWMA-proportion control charts to monitor the multinomial-proportions process. Based on the derived in-control exact mean and variance of the chi-square statistic, we calculate the control limits of the exact EWMA-proportion control chart for various small and large sample sizes using the Monte Carlo method. Based on the asymptotic chi-square distribution with df m − 1, we calculate the control limits of the asymptotic EWMA-proportion control chart for a large enough sample size using the Markov chain method.
From numerical analyses, we find that control limits (5) and (7) with the same preset in-control ARL and out-of-control detection ability are nearly the same when the sample size is large enough, e.g., n 6000 under scenarios (1) and (2). For small or moderate sample size, the exact EWMA-proportion control chart is in-control robust, but the asymptotic control chart’s in-control ARL is more or less than the preset ALR0 = 370.4. The misuse of the asymptotic control chart results in worse out-of-control detection performance. Thus, we strongly suggest to adopt the proposed exact control chart to monitor a multinomial-proportions process. Moreover, the proposed exact EWMA proportion chart can be adopted to monitor the change in proportions of categories of a distribution-free or unknown continuous distributed multivariate process. A numerical example utilizing semiconductor manufacturing data was discussed to illustrate the application of the proposed exact EWMA proportion chart. The illustration of real data example shows good detection performance of the proposed chart.
In this study, we have developed a novel, efficient, and exact EWMA-proportion control chart specifically designed for monitoring a multinomial-proportion process. Unlike existing literature, which focuses on control charts for multinomial proportions with large or infinite sample sizes, our proposed method is tailored for small and medium sample sizes. Our exact EWMA-proportion control chart offers significant potential for providing sustainable solutions across various industries. We recommend applying this method not only for monitoring multinomial proportions in a multinomial process but also for distribution-free or unknown continuous distributed multivariate processes. By utilizing the proposed exact EWMA-proportion control chart, organizations can effectively monitor and control their processes, enabling them to identify and address deviations or shifts in the multinomial proportions. This approach holds promise for enhancing quality assurance, process optimization, and overall operational performance in diverse industrial settings.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.-F.Y. and L.-P.C.; methodology, S.-F.Y. and S.G.; software, S.G.; validation, S.-F.Y.; formal analysis, S.G.; resources, S.-F.Y. and L.-P.C.; data curation, S.-F.Y. and S.G.; writing—original draft preparation, S.-F.Y. and S.G.; writing—review and editing, S.-F.Y.; visualization, S.-F.Y. and S.G.; supervision, S.-F.Y. and L.-P.C.; funding acquisition, S.-F.Y. and S.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The work was funded by Fujian Polytechnic Normal University (No.HX2022147), China, and Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province (No.2021J011235),China, and National Science and Technology Council (NSTC 110-2118-M-004-001-MY2), Taiwan.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

This study received complete support from Department of Statistics, National Chengchi University, Taiwan, National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan, and School of Big Data & Artificial Intelligence, Fujian Polytechnic Normal University, Fuqing, China.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

X = ( X 1 , X 2 , , X m ) T is a multinomial distribution associated with size n and probability vector p 0 = ( p 0 , 1 , p 0 , 2 , , p 0 , m ) .Thus X ’s probability density function (pdf) is
p ( X 1 = x 1 , X 2 = x 2 , , X m = x m ) = n ! x 1 ! x 2 ! x m ! p 0 , 1 x 1 p 0 , 2 x 2 p 0 , m x m
where i = 1 m x i = n , i = 1 m p 0 , i = 1 . The marginal pdf of X i , i = 1 , 2 , , m is
p ( X i = x i ) = n ! x i ! ( n x i ) ! p 0 , i x i ( 1 p 0 , i ) n x i
We then have E ( X i ) = n p 0 , i , V a r ( X i ) = n p 0 , i ( 1 p 0 , i ) . Hence, we get:
p ( X j = x j | X i = x i ) = p ( X j = x j , X i = x i ) / p ( X i = x i ) = ( n ! / x j ! x i ! ( n x i x j ) ! ) p 0 , i x i p 0 , j x j ( 1 p 0 , i p 0 , j ) n x i x j ( n ! / x i ! ( n x i ) ! ) p 0 , i x i ( 1 p 0 , i ) n x i = ( n x i ) ! x j ! ( n x i x j ) ! p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i x j 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i n x i x j .
We immediately see that X j | X i = x i follows a binomial ( n x i , p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i ) distribution.
Now, the following assertion (a) holds.
(a)
E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 4 = n p 0 , i ( 1 p 0 , i ) ( 1 + 3 p 0 , i 2 3 p 0 , i ) + 3 n 2 p 0 , i 2 ( 1 p i ) 2 3 n p 0 , i 2 ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 .
Proof: suppose that X i 1 , X i 2 , , X i n are i.i.d Bernoulli ( p 0 , i ) and then
X i = j = 1 n X i j ~ binomial ( n , p 0 , i ) ,
E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 4 = E j = 1 n ( X i j p 0 , i ) 4 = E j 1 j 2 j 3 j 4 ( X i j 1 p 0 , i ) ( X i j 2 p 0 , i ) ( X i j 3 p 0 , i ) ( X i j 4 p 0 , i ) = j = 1 n E ( X i j p 0 , i ) 4 + 3 j 1 = 1 n j 2 j 1 E ( X i j 1 p 0 , i ) 2 E ( X i j 2 p 0 , j ) 2 = n [ p 0 , i 4 ( 1 p 0 , i ) + ( 1 p 0 , i ) 4 p 0 , i ] + 3 n ( n 1 ) p 0 , i 2 ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 .
Under a similar discussion to E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 4 , we can obtain
(b)
E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 3 = j = 1 n E ( X i j p 0 , i ) 3 = n [ ( 1 p 0 , i ) 3 p 0 , i p 0 , i 3 ( 1 p 0 , i ) ] .
Thus, we have
i = 1 m E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 4 n 2 p 0 , i 2 = i = 1 m 1 n p 0 , i 4 m 6 n 3 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 n + 3 i = 1 m ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 3 i = 1 m ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 n = i = 1 m 1 n p 0 , i 4 m 6 n 3 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 n + 3 m 6 + 3 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 3 m 6 + 3 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 n = i = 1 m 1 n p 0 , i 7 m 12 + 6 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 n + i = 1 m 3 p 0 , i 2 + 3 m 6 .
For i j , we get
E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 ( X j n p 0 , j ) 2 = E { ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 E [ ( X j n p 0 , j ) 2 | X i ] } = E { ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 [ ( E ( X j | X i ) n p 0 , j ) 2 + V a r ( X j | X i ) ] } = E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 p 0 , j 2 ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 + ( n X i ) p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i = p 0 , j 2 ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 4 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 3 + n p 0 , j 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 = p 0 , j 2 ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 n p 0 , i ( 1 p 0 , i ) ( 1 + 3 p 0 , i 2 3 p 0 , i ) + 3 n 2 p 0 , i 2 ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 3 n p 0 , i 2 ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i n [ ( 1 p 0 , i ) 3 p 0 , i p 0 , i 3 ( 1 p 0 , i ) ] + n 2 p 0 , i p 0 , j ( 1 p 0 , i ) 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i .
Next, we have
i = 1 m j i E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 ( X j n p 0 , j ) 2 n 2 p 0 , i p 0 , j = i = 1 m j i p 0 , j n ( 1 p 0 , i ) ( 1 + 3 p 0 , i 2 3 p 0 , i ) 3 p 0 , i ( 1 p 0 , i ) + i = 1 m j i 3 p 0 , i p 0 , j i = 1 m j i 1 n 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i [ ( 1 p 0 , i ) 2 p 0 , i 2 ] + i = 1 m j i ( 1 p 0 , i ) 1 p 0 , j 1 p 0 , i = i = 1 m 1 n ( 1 + 3 p 0 , i 2 3 p 0 , i ) 3 p 0 , i ( 1 p 0 , i ) + i = 1 m 3 p 0 , i ( 1 p 0 , i ) i = 1 m 1 n ( m 2 ) ( 1 2 p 0 , i ) + i = 1 m ( 1 p 0 , i ) ( m 2 ) = m 6 + 6 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 n + 3 i = 1 m 3 p 0 , i 2 1 n ( m 2 ) 2 + ( m 1 ) ( m 2 ) .
Furthermore, i = 1 m E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 n p 0 , i = i = 1 m ( 1 p 0 , i ) = m 1 .
Hence, we have
V a r i = 1 m E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 n p 0 , i = i = 1 m E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 4 n 2 p 0 , i 2 + i = 1 m j i E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 ( X j n p 0 , j ) 2 n 2 p 0 , i p 0 , j i = 1 m E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 n p 0 , i 2 = i = 1 m 1 n p 0 , i 7 m 12 + 6 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 n + i = 1 m 3 p 0 , i 2 + 3 m 6 + m 6 + 6 i = 1 m p 0 , i 2 n + 3 i = 1 m 3 p 0 , i 2 1 n ( m 2 ) 2 + ( m 1 ) ( m 2 ) ( m 1 ) 2 = i = 1 m 1 n p 0 , i m 2 + 2 m 2 n + 2 ( m 1 ) .
As n , V a r i = 1 m E ( X i n p 0 , i ) 2 n p 0 , i 2 ( m 1 ) = V a r ( χ 2 ( m 1 ) ) .

Appendix B. R Program Language

Algorithm A1. The Monte Carlo simulation steps to find L n of the exact multinomial-proportion control chart in given ARL0
1: For a given in-control, p 0 = ( p 0 , 1 , p 0 , 2 , , p 0 , m ) , λ , n , and specified ARL0 (e.g., ARL0≈370).
2: Set a < L < b , e.g., a = 2 and b = 3 for ARL0 ≈ 370.
3: Monte Carlo procedure:
4: For N from 1 to M ,set M = 1,000,000 and perform the following:
5: Let E W M A χ 0 2 = m 1 , and t = 1 .
6: Simulate Xt from multinomial distribution with p0 and size n,and calculate χ t 2 ,
7:  if t = 1 then
8:    E W M A χ 1 2 = ( 1 λ ) ( m 1 ) + λ χ t 2 .
9:  end if
10:  if t 1 then
11:    E W M A χ t 2 = λ χ t 2 + ( 1 λ ) E W M A χ t 1 2 .
12:   end if
13:  Given L , and calculate U C L t ,
14:  if E W M A χ t 2 < U C L t , then
15:   t t + 1 . Go to step line 6.
16:  end if
17:   if E W M A χ t 2 U C L t , then
18:   take t N = t as run length, let N N + 1 and go to step 5.
19:  end if
20:  end for
21: Calculate A R ^ L 0 = 1 M N = 1 M t N , and determine L n by | A R ^ L 0 A R L 0 | < 0.8

Appendix C. R Program Language

Algorithm A2. The Monte Carlo simulation steps to calculate ARL1 of the exact multinomial-proportion control chart
1: For   a   given   in - control ,   p 0 = ( p 0 , 1 , p 0 , 2 , , p 0 , m ) , λ , n ,   and   an   out - of - control   p 1   and   L n obtained by Algorithm A1 above.
2: Monte Carlo procedure:
3: For N from 1 to M , set M = 1,000,000 and perform the following:
4: Let E W M A χ 0 2 = m 1 , and t = 1 .
5: Simulate Xt from multinomial distribution with p1 and size n, and calculate χ t 2 .
6:   if t = 1 then
7:    E W M A χ 1 2 = ( 1 λ ) ( m 1 ) + λ χ t 2 .
8:    end if
9:   if t 1 then
10:    E W M A χ t 2 = λ χ t 2 + ( 1 λ ) E W M A χ t 1 2 .
11:   end if
12:    Given   L n , and calculate U C L t ,
13:   if E W M A χ t 2 < U C L t , then
14:    t t + 1 . Go to step 5.
15:   end if
16:   if E W M A χ t 2 U C L t , then
17:    take   t N = t   as   run   length ,   let   N N + 1 and go to step 4.
18:   end if
19:   end for
20: Calculate   A R ^ L 1 = 1 M N = 1 M t N , take it as an estimator of ARL1.

References

  1. Sikdar, S.K. Sustainable development and sustainability metrics. AIChE J. 2003, 49, 1928–1932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bakshi, B.R.; Fiksel, J. The quest for sustainability: Challenges for processsystems engineering. AIChE J. 2003, 49, 1350–1358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Cabezas, H.; Pawlowski, C.W.; Mayer, A.L.; Hoagland, N. Sustainable systemstheory: Ecological and other aspects. J. Clean. Prod. 2005, 13, 455–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Daoutidis, P.; Zachar, M.; Jogwar, S.S. Sustainability and process control: A survey and perspective. J. Process Control 2016, 44, 184–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Anderson, M.J.; Thompson, A.A. Multivariate control charts for ecological and environmental monitoring. Ecol. Appl. 2004, 14, 1921–1935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Morrison, L.W. The use of control charts to interpret environmental monitoring data. Nat. Areas J. 2008, 28, 66–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gove, A.D.; Sadler, R.; Matsuki, M.; Archibald, R.; Pearse, S.; Garkaklis, M. Control charts for improved decisions in environmental management: A case study of catchment water supply in south-west Western Australia. Ecol. Manag. Restor. 2013, 14, 127–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Oliveira da Silva, F.M.; Silvério, K.S.; Castanheira, M.I.; Raposo, M.; Imaginário, M.J.; Simões, I.; Almeida, M.A. Construction of control charts to help in the stability and reliability of results in an accredited water quality control laboratory. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Shafqat, A.; Sabir, A.; Yang, S.-F.; Aslam, M.; Albassam, M.; Abbas, K. Monitoring and comparing air and green House Gases Emissions of various vountries. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Montgomery, D.C. Introduction to Statistical Quality Control, 8th ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  11. Reynolds, M.R.; Stoumbos, Z.G. The SPRT chart for monitoring a proportion. IIE Trans. 1998, 30, 545–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Reynolds, M.R.; Stoumbos, Z.G. Monitoring a proportion using CUSUM and SPRT control charts. In Frontiers in Statistical Quality Control 6; Physica: Heidelberg, Germany, 2001; pp. 155–175. [Google Scholar]
  13. Qiu, P. Distribution-free multivariate process control based on log-linear modeling. IIE Trans. 2008, 40, 664–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Marcucci, M. Monitoring multinomial processes. J. Qual. Technol. 1985, 17, 86–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nelson, L.S. A chi-square control chart for several proportions. J. Qual. Technol. 1987, 19, 229–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Crosier, R.B. Multivariate generalizations of cumulative sum quality-control schemes. Technometrics 1988, 30, 291–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Qiu, P. Introduction to Statistical Process Control, 1st ed.; Chapman and Hall/CRC Press: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  18. Ryan, A.G.; Wells, L.J.; Woodall, W.H. Methods for monitoring multiple proportions when inspecting continuously. J. Qual. Technol. 2011, 43, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Li, J.; Tsung, F.; Zou, C. Multivariate binomial/multinomial control chart. IIE Trans. 2014, 46, 526–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Huang, W.; Reynolds, M.R., Jr.; Wang, S. A binomial GLR control chart for monitoring a proportion. J. Qual. Technol. 2012, 44, 192–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Huang, W.; Wang, S.; Reynolds, M.R., Jr. A generalized likelihood ratio chart for monitoring Bernoulli processes. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 2013, 29, 665–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lee, J.; Peng, Y.; Wang, N.; Reynolds, M.R., Jr. A GLR control chart for monitoring a multinomial process. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 2017, 33, 1773–1782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yang, S.-F.; Chen, L.-P.; Lin, J.-K. Adjustment of measurement error effects on dispersion control chart with distribution-free quality variable. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lucas, J.M.; Saccucci, M.S. Exponentially weighted moving average control schemes: Properties and enhancements. Technometrics 1990, 32, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Chandrasekaran, S.; English, J.R.; Disney, R.L. Modeling and analysis of EWMA control schemes with variance-adjusted control limits. IIE Trans. 1995, 27, 282–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. McCann, M.; Johnston, A. UCI Machine Learning Repository. Available online: https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/SECOM (accessed on 1 December 2021).
Figure 1. The in-control charting statistics on the exact EWMA-proportion control chart.
Figure 1. The in-control charting statistics on the exact EWMA-proportion control chart.
Sustainability 15 11797 g001
Figure 2. The out-of-control charting statistics on the exact EWMA-proportion control chart.
Figure 2. The out-of-control charting statistics on the exact EWMA-proportion control chart.
Sustainability 15 11797 g002
Table 2. The coefficient (Ln) of UCL with specified ARL0 = 370.4 for various n and two scenarios of in-control proportion vectors.
Table 2. The coefficient (Ln) of UCL with specified ARL0 = 370.4 for various n and two scenarios of in-control proportion vectors.
nLn
Scenario (1)Scenario (2)
1-2.414
22.3822.605
32.3772.600
42.3882.550
52.4012.537
62.3882.525
72.3942.513
82.3982.501
92.4032.492
102.3952.489
112.4042.485
122.4092.474
132.4032.471
142.4032.467
152.4092.468
162.4072.464
172.4062.456
182.4082.452
192.4082.454
202.4062.453
502.4132.430
1002.4142.423
2002.4162.419
4002.4182.419
6002.4192.419
8002.4192.420
10002.4192.420
20002.4182.419
40002.4162.418
50002.4162.417
60002.4162.417
Table 5. ARLs of the asymptotic control chart under various n for scenario (1) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
Table 5. ARLs of the asymptotic control chart under various n for scenario (1) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
n p 0 p 1 p 2 p 3 p 4 p 5 p 6
23880.926
3896.139
3123.472
3131.111
720.986
713.365
280.329
267.982
2074.137
2077.971
100.033
87.278
32.574
23.585
31078.071
1157.757
791.313
852.399
135.773
143.038
54.859
54.858
449.865
486.158
21.522
20.860
8.127
7.673
4757.384
789.150
509.243
530.552
69.903
67.986
29.123
25.865
255.223
264.734
12.387
10.735
5.275
4.127
5648.207
671.590
398.79
412.093
44.919
41.702
18.887
15.778
178.058
181.867
8.516
6.820
3.906
2.517
6569.374
600.160
321.301
338.397
30.593
28.619
12.860
10.987
129.408
134.551
5.840
4.960
2.674
1.853
7535.804
565.679
277.828
292.373
23.219
21.278
9.835
8.174
102.369
105.892
4.649
3.783
2.184
1.425
8506.336
538.152
241.435
255.351
18.239
16.578
7.768
6.409
82.654
85.335
3.753
3.033
1.818
1.155
9483.561
518.434
212.767
227.899
14.599
13.408
6.212
5.205
68.121
71.033
3.058
2.507
1.524
0.909
10476.051
503.278
194.730
204.614
12.641
11.060
5.506
4.240
59.056
59.678
2.837
2.081
1.515
0.774
11458.735
490.911
173.615
184.745
10.581
9.367
4.643
3.601
50.003
51.157
2.415
1.800
1.356
0.653
12455.017
481.168
160.708
168.485
9.410
8.035
4.172
3.048
44.605
44.578
2.298
1.549
1.322
0.577
13446.672
476.889
146.102
154.694
8.163
7.040
3.641
2.673
38.955
39.251
2.015
1.383
1.200
0.475
14439.888
468.259
134.735
141.612
7.318
6.176
3.300
2.341
34.911
34.699
1.919
1.230
1.173
0.427
15437.203
465.765
125.143
131.462
6.589
5.493
3.032
2.066
31.407
31.184
1.775
1.100
1.134
0.372
16428.399
458.844
115.217
121.453
5.884
4.944
2.715
1.867
28.267
28.076
1.636
0.989
1.086
0.302
17425.681
454.903
107.603
112.808
5.423
4.465
2.523
1.674
25.919
25.447
1.573
0.902
1.073
0.274
18420.922
451.455
100.071
105.644
4.913
4.088
2.287
1.532
23.522
23.301
1.465
0.815
1.050
0.228
19417.849
448.075
93.837
98.522
4.547
3.733
2.148
1.394
21.729
21.368
1.411
0.745
1.036
0.192
20416.766
445.050
88.216
92.002
4.277
3.407
2.062
1.270
20.240
19.673
1.385
0.692
1.035
0.187
50386.868
415.975
25.082
24.631
1.480
0.785
1.044
0.21
5.391
4.773
1.008
0.090
1.000
0.000
100378.202
406.259
9.145
8.405
9.082
0.204
1.000
0.009
2.319
1.688
1.000
0.002
1.000
0.000
200374.087
403.003
3.575
2.921
1.000
0.011
1.000
0.000
1.288
0.590
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
400370.638
399.267
1.692
1.028
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.020
0.143
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
600369.798
398.157
1.256
0.543
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.001
0.032
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
800369.017
397.659
1.100
0.323
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.005
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1000368.672
397.161
1.038
0.197
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.002
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
2000369.183
398.185
1.000
0.013
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
4000369.313
398.385
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
5000369.596
398.369
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
6000369.646
397.875
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
Table 6. ARLs of the asymptotic control chart under various n for scenario (2) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
Table 6. ARLs of the asymptotic control chart under various n for scenario (2) with the six out-of-control proportion vectors.
n p 0 p 1 p 2 p 3 p 4 p 5 p 6
1149.100
190.427
149.131
190.656
149.435
190.444
5.099
6.226
9.434
11.788
23.891
30.444
5.091
6.220
2211.107
232.441
156.108
174.418
81.979
94.030
6.891
5.926
12.582
12.043
31.619
32.925
7.071
6.270
3234.377
261.884
141.543
160.014
56.129
64.268
4.239
4.098
9.132
9.570
26.670
28.990
4.632
4.644
4254.595
278.088
128.980
140.884
42.294
45.288
3.612
3.110
8.095
8.012
24.825
25.974
4.000
3.723
5270.693
292.512
114.659
124.793
31.555
33.353
3.292
2.500
7.366
6.881
23.010
23.390
3.731
3.122
6278.487
305.263
100.133
110.100
24.204
25.650
2.654
2.071
6.237
6.021
20.532
21.291
3.071
2.669
7287.245
315.190
88.690
97.624
19.511
20.162
2.287
1.712
5.416
5.256
18.594
19.448
2.658
2.267
8297.024
320.759
80.086
85.897
16.506
16.214
2.091
1.454
5.043
4.642
17.515
17.787
2.494
1.970
9300.812
326.830
70.928
76.427
13.705
13.386
1.919
1.251
4.657
4.157
16.204
16.357
2.369
1.746
10306.108
331.928
63.493
68.176
11.661
11.222
1.724
1.097
4.157
3.778
14.883
15.099
2.087
1.564
11309.943
337.242
56.698
60.932
9.940
9.547
1.580
0.959
3.788
3.422
13.764
14.016
1.934
1.400
12316.717
342.484
52.133
55.010
9.015
8.221
1.539
0.860
3.694
3.120
13.238
13.089
1.936
1.271
13320.280
346.034
47.283
49.674
7.963
7.166
1.435
0.762
3.361
2.858
12.291
12.203
1.753
1.151
14321.785
348.787
42.931
44.946
7.119
6.303
1.360
0.683
3.138
2.637
11.508
11.437
1.672
1.055
15324.025
351.660
39.232
40.889
6.411
5.595
1.324
0.623
2.937
2.449
10.800
10.737
1.583
0.971
16326.148
353.893
35.968
37.359
5.705
5.013
1.262
0.559
2.775
2.274
10.223
10.121
1.510
0.890
17329.612
356.022
33.574
34.347
5.438
4.462
1.232
0.514
2.665
2.118
9.756
9.515
1.474
0.830
18331.238
357.644
31.008
31.556
4.978
4.048
1.189
0.463
2.541
1.986
9.284
9.023
1.432
0.774
19331.958
359.795
28.646
29.015
4.585
3.687
1.165
0.426
2.400
1.866
8.792
8.556
1.360
0.712
20333.886
361.667
26.651
26.966
4.261
3.367
1.147
0.395
2.318
1.751
8.365
8.096
1.350
0.675
50355.057
381.753
7.161
6.34
1.417
0.611
1.001
0.025
1.241
0.529
3.38
2.797
1.019
0.137
100362.178
391.087
2.801
2.107
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.018
0.134
1.751
1.113
1.000
0.007
200366.135
393.971
1.404
0.708
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.007
1.140
0.390
1.000
0.000
400367.412
396.169
1.031
0.177
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.005
0.000
1.000
0.000
600367.196
396.301
1.002
0.042
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.009
1.000
0.000
800367.608
396.326
1.000
0.008
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.001
1.000
0.000
1000367.333
395.985
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
2000367.691
396.363
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
4000368.637
397.286
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
5000368.955
397.586
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
6000370.236
399.095
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
0.000
Table 7. The in-control statistics and UCL of the exact control chart.
Table 7. The in-control statistics and UCL of the exact control chart.
Number
t
n 11 n 12 n 21 n 22 χ t 2 E W M A χ t 2 U C L t
140013.0843.0043.363
230021.1462.9113.500
340013.0842.923.598
422017.373.1423.674
512027.3373.3523.735
620031.0913.2393.787
730021.1463.1343.831
811122.6943.1123.869
910132.5193.0833.901
1002039.1863.3883.930
1140013.0843.3733.955
1211122.6943.3393.977
1320121.6223.2533.999
1410042.9183.2364.017
1550006.9053.424.032
1620031.0913.3034.046
1710132.5193.2644.058
1830112.6083.2314.069
1920121.6223.1514.078
2000056.6283.3254.087
Table 8. The out-of-control statistics of the exact EWMA control chart.
Table 8. The out-of-control statistics of the exact EWMA control chart.
Sampling Time
t
n 11 n 12 n 21 n 22 χ t 2 E W M A χ t 2
1002310.6153.381
200145.2993.477
300145.2993.568
4002310.6153.92
5002310.6154.255
6002310.6154.573
700056.6284.676
8002310.6154.973
900145.2994.989
1000056.6285.071
1100056.6285.149
1200056.6285.223
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gan, S.; Yang, S.-F.; Chen, L.-P. A New EWMA Control Chart for Monitoring Multinomial Proportions. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11797. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511797

AMA Style

Gan S, Yang S-F, Chen L-P. A New EWMA Control Chart for Monitoring Multinomial Proportions. Sustainability. 2023; 15(15):11797. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511797

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gan, Shengjin, Su-Fen Yang, and Li-Pang Chen. 2023. "A New EWMA Control Chart for Monitoring Multinomial Proportions" Sustainability 15, no. 15: 11797. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511797

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop