|
|
|
|
![]() | |
| Reliability HotWire | |
| Reliability Basics | |
|
Understanding Biasedness
There are many properties associated with parameter estimates, such as minimum variance, sufficiency, consistency, efficiency, completeness and biasedness. The property called biasedness is commonly discussed within reliability engineering and statistics, but what does it really mean? What is a biased estimator? This article will explore the concept of biasedness and try to shed some light on this often misunderstood topic. Background
But
what does this really mean? First of all, biasedness comes into play when
conducting analysis using maximum
likelihood estimation (MLE). The discussion of MLE is beyond the scope
of this article, but one of the properties of MLE is that it is
asymptotically unbiased. This implies that as the sample size increases, you
can expect to converge to a more accurate result. As an example, let us
consider the shape parameter, b (or beta),
of the Weibull distribution. It is widely known that beta is biased. The
degree of biasing will increase for small sample sizes and the effect can be
increased depending on the amount of censoring in the data. Keep in mind that for
large sample sizes, the distribution of the parameter estimates themselves
is normal (MLE property). Therefore, as the sample size increases the shape parameter,
which we know is biased, will approach the condition such that E[ Example Figure
1: Beta and Eta values for Case 1
The
estimated b
and h
values for the first 20 data sets for Case 2 (100 samples in each) are shown
in Figure 2.
Figure
2: Beta and Eta values for Case 2
In
this example it is known that b
= 1.5. It was given. For a moment, assume that the value of b
is not biased. Now, if the values of b
have also been sorted in ascending order, where would you expect the value
of b
to come the closest to the true value (b
= 1.5)? If you assume that the parameter values are distributed normally
then you would expect to come the closest to the true value at the midpoint
of the distribution. But we know b
is biased so this obviously will not be the case. Where will it approach the
true value? The further away from the midpoint of the distribution this
occurs the greater the amount of biasing. From Figure 3 you can see for Case
1 that the value of b
approaches 1.5 at 39.1% (not the midpoint). The values of beta are in column
B and the values of eta are in column C.
Figure
3: Beta approaches true value at 39.10% for Case 1
The
biasing of b
is fairly obvious with a sample size of 10. The biasing is represented by
the offset from the midpoint of the distribution where the value of beta is
closest to the true value. For Case 2 and a sample size of 100 see Figure 4.
Figure
4: Beta approaches true value at 48.20% for Case 2
You
can see that for a sample size of 100 the value of beta that is closest to
the true value occurs at a point that is very near the midpoint of the
distribution. This implies that the biasing is not as pronounced with the
larger sample size since it is much closer to the midpoint (50%) of the
distribution.
Conclusion
| |
|
Copyright © 2003 ReliaSoft Corporation, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED | |
|
Comments or Questions: Webmaster@ReliaSoft.comweibull.com is a service of ReliaSoft Corporation Copyright © 1992-2008 ReliaSoft Corporation, All Rights Reserved Last updated: 04/29/2008 02:06:47 AM |
SITE
[Home] [Site
Contents] |