Abu-Zinadah 2015
Abu-Zinadah 2015
Abstract:
• The four-parameter beta generalized inverted exponential distribution is considered
in this article. Various properties of the model with graphs of the density function
are investigated. Moreover, the maximum likelihood method of estimation is used
for estimating the parameters of the model under complete samples. An asymptotic
Fisher information matrix of the estimators is found. Additionally, confidence interval
estimates of the parameters are obtained. The performances of findings of the arti-
cle are shown by demonstrating various numerical illustrations through Monte Carlo
simulation studies. Finally, applications on real data-sets are provided.
Key-Words:
1. INTRODUCTION
For a positive real value a > 0, (2.2) can be rewritten as an infinite power
series in the form
−λ α(b+k)−1
∞
αλ exp −λ X (−1)k Γ(a)
x
(2.3) f (x) = 1 − exp ,
x2 B(a, b) k!Γ(a − k) x
k=0
x > 0, a, b, α, and λ > 0 .
From (2.3), the corresponding cdf can be written as follows
−λ α(b+k)
∞
(−1)k+1
1 X
(2.4) F (x) = 1 − exp ,
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1) x
k=0
x > 0, a, b, α and λ > 0 .
The GIED is a special case of (2.2) when a = b = 1. Therefore, we can assume all
of the properties of the GIED that were investigated by Abouammoh and Alshin-
giti (2009) still hold. Additionally, when α = 1 in (2.2), the BIED is obtained,
which is related to the BGIWD when the shape parameters are equal to one and
has been discussed by Baharith et al. (2014).
3. STATISTICAL PROPERTIES
−λ α(b+k)
∞
(−1)k+1
1 X
(3.1) R(x) = 1 − 1 − exp ,
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1) x
k=0
αλ exp( −λ ∞
x ) (−1)k Γ(a) −λ α(b+k)−1
P
2
x B(a,b) k!Γ(a−k) 1 − exp x
k=0
(3.2) h(x) = ∞ ,
1 (−1)k+1 −λ α(b+k)
P
1 − B(a,b) a(b+k)B(a−k,k+1) 1 − exp x
k=0
Figure 2 shows different choices for the parameters of the BGIED. Additionally, it
is shown from Figure 3 that the hazard function of the BGIED has an upside down
bathtub shape. As is shown, the hazard function increases and then decreases.
The upside down bathtub hazard function indicates that the risk of failing de-
creases as soon as the item has passed a specific time, during which it may have
experienced some type of stress. Thus, the BGIED shows good statistical behav-
ior based on these two functions.
The beta Generalized Inverted Exponential Distribution... 71
The rth moment about the origin, µ′r = E(X r ) of a BGIED with pdf (2.2)
in the non-closed form is
a−1
−λ α −λ αb−1
−λ
αλ exp
Z ∞
′ r x
µr = x 1 − 1 − exp 1 − exp dx ,
0 x2 B(a, b) x x
r = 1, 2, ...
that is, for k ≥ r, µ′r takes the closed form
∞ X ∞
λr X (−1)k+j (j + 1)r−1
(3.3) µ′r =
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1)B(j + 1, α(b + k) − j)
k=0 j=0
(∞ )
X (−1)i
× + Er (1) ,
i!(i − r + 1)
i=0
where B(a, b) is the beta function, and En (z) is called the exponential integral
function (Abramowitz and Stegun (1972)), which is defined as
Z ∞
exp (−zt)
(3.4) En (z) = dt .
1 tn
Substituting r = 1 in (3.3), we obtain the mean of the BGIED as follows
∞ X ∞
λ X (−1)k+j
(3.5) µ =
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1)B(j + 1, α(b + k) − j)
k=1 j=0
(∞ )
X (−1)i
× + E1 (1) ,
i2 (i − 1)!
i=1
where Iu−1 (a, b) is the inverse of the incomplete beta function with parameters a
and b, such that Z u
1
Iu (a, b) = ̟a−1 (1 − ̟)b−1 d̟ ,
B(a, b) 0
The above form of q(u) allows us to derive the following forms of statistical
measures for the BGIED:
1. The first quartile Q1, the second quartile Q2 (median), and the third
quartile Q3 of the BGIED correspond to the values u = 0.25, 0.50, and
0.75, respectively
2. The median (m), also, can be found using (2.4) such that 1− exp −λ
m < 1,
for a = 1, and then
−λ
(3.8) m = h 1
i.
log 1 − (−0.5) αb
When a = b = 1 in (2.3), (3.3) and (3.7) give the moments and the quantile
of GIED, and, when a = b = α = 1 in (2.3), (3.3) and (3.7) give the moments and
the quantile of IED. Therefore, all measures above are satisfied for GIED when
a = b = 1, and for IED when a = b = α = 1.
3.4.1. The mean deviation from the mean can be found from the following theorem:
Theorem 1. The mean deviation from the mean of the BGIED is in the
form
∞
∞ X
2 X (−1)k+1+j
E(|X − µ|) =
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1) [α(b + k) + 1]
k=0 j=0
µ exp (−jλ/µ) − jλΓ (0, jλ/µ)
× ,
B [j + 1, α(b + k) − j + 1]
R∞
where Γ (a, z) = z ta−1 exp (−t) dt.
where
Z c
(3.11) exp (−jλ/x) dx = c exp (−jλ/c) − jλΓ (0, jλ/c) .
0
3.4.2. The mean deviation from the median can be found from the following theorem:
Theorem 2. The mean deviation from the median of the BGIED is in the
form
∞
∞ X
2 X (−1)(k+j) jλ
E(|X − m|) = µ +
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1) [α(b + k) + 1]
k=0 j=0
Γ (0, jλ/m)
× , jλ > 0, m > 0 .
B(j + 1, α(b + k) − j + 1)
E(|X − m|) = µ − m
∞
∞ X
2 X (−1)k+j+1 [m exp (−jλ/m) − jλΓ (0, jλ/m)]
+
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1) [α(b + k) + 1]
k=0 j=0
1
×
B [j + 1, α(b + k) − j + 1]
= µ − m + 2mF (m)
∞
∞ X
2 X (−1)k+j jλΓ (0, jλ/m)
+
B(a, b) a(b + k)B(a − k, k + 1) [α(b + k) + 1]
k=0 j=0
1
× .
B [j + 1, α(b + k) − j + 1]
Hence, the theorem is proved.
The beta Generalized Inverted Exponential Distribution... 75
The mode for the BGIED can be found by differentiating f (x) with respect
to x; thus, (2.2) gives
−2 λ λ
f ′ (x) = f (x) + 2 − (αb − 1) [1 − exp (−λ/x)]−1 2 exp (−λ/x)
x x x
(3.13) + (a − 1) [1 − (1 − exp (−λ/x))α ]−1
αλ α−1
× 2 exp (−λ/x) (1 − exp (−λ/x)) .
x
Then, the mode of the BGIED can be found numerically by solving (3.14).
The results of studying the behaviour of the BGIED are shown in Table 1
and Figure 1. We note that the distribution is unimodal and positively skewed.
For fixed values of a, b and α, the kurtosis values remain constant; therefore, the
mode, median and mean increase with the increase of λ. As we increase the value
of α ≥ 1 and fix the other parameters, the kurtosis value increases and the mean
decreases. It is noted that the distribution has a long right tail for fixed values
of b, α and λ. Moreover, for fixed values of a, α and λ the kurtosis and the mean
76 R.A. Bakoban and Hanaa H. Abu-Zinadah
n
Y
(4.1) L(θ|x) = f (xi ) ,
i=1
n
X
(4.2) ℓ = log L(θ|x) = log f (xi ) .
i=1
Assuming that the parameters θ = (a, b, α, λ), are unknown, the likelihood equa-
tions are given for θ
∂ log L 1 ∂f (xi )
lj = = =0, j = 1, 2, 3, 4 .
∂θj f (xi ) ∂θj
n −1 X n
∂ log L n X
−1 λ
= + (αb − 1) xi exp −1 − x−1
i
∂λ λ xi
i=1 i=1
n
" −α #−1 −1
X
−1 −λ λ
(4.5) −α(a − 1) xi 1 − exp −1 exp −1 ,
xi xi
i=1
n α
∂ log L −n X −λ
= φ1 + log 1 − 1 − exp ,
∂a B(a, b) xi
i=1
n
∂ log L X −λ
(4.7) = −n [ψ(b) − ψ(a + b)] + α log 1 − exp .
∂b xi
i=1
The solution of the four nonlinear likelihood equations via (4.4), (4.5), (4.6)
and (4.7) yields the maximum likelihood estimates (MLEs) θ̂ = (â, b̂, α̂, λ̂) of θ =
(a, b, α, λ). These equations are in implicit form, so they may be solved using
numerical iteration, such as the Newton–Raphson method via Mathematica 9.0.
∂ 2 log L
2
= −n ψ ′ (a) − ψ ′ (a + b) ,
∂a
where
∂ψ(z)
ψ ′ (z) = ,
∂z
∂ 2 log L ′ ′
= −n ψ (b) − ψ (a + b) ,
∂b2
∂ 2 log L
= n ψ ′ (a + b) ,
∂a ∂b
#−1
n
"
∂ 2 log L
−1
−λ −α
X
−1 λ
= xi exp −1 b − (a − 1) 1− exp −1
∂λ ∂α xi xi
i=1
α log 1 − exp −λ
xi
× 1 + h α i ,
1 − 1 − exp −λxi
n
" #−1
∂ 2 log L −λ −α
−1
X λ
= −α x−1
i 1 − exp −1 exp −1 ,
∂λ ∂a xi xi
i=1
The beta Generalized Inverted Exponential Distribution... 79
n
∂ 2 log L
−1
X
−1 λ
= α xi exp −1 ,
∂λ ∂b xi
i=1
n " #−1
∂ 2 log L −λ −α
X −λ
= − log 1 − exp 1 − exp −1 ,
∂α ∂a xi xi
i=1
n
∂ 2 log L
X −λ
= log 1 − exp .
∂α ∂b xi
i=1
6. INTERVAL ESTIMATES
where Lθ and Uθ are the lower and upper confidence limits that enclose θ with
probability γ. The interval [Lθ , Uθ ] is called a 100γ % confidence interval for θ.
For large sample sizes (Bain and Engelhardt (1992)), the maximum like-
lihood estimates, under appropriate regularity conditions, are consistent and
asymptotically normally distributed. Therefore, the approximate 100γ % con-
fidence limits for the maximum likelihood estimate θ̂ of a population parameter θ
can be constructed, such that
θ̂ − θ
(6.1) P −z ≤ ≤z = γ,
σ(θ̂)
7. SIMULATION STUDIES
θ̂ − θ 2
ARBias θ̂ = and MSE θ̂ = E θ̂ − θ .
θ
Step 1. 1000 random samples of sizes n = 10(10)50, 100, 200 and 300 were
generated from the BGIED. The true parameter values are se-
lected as (a = 1, b = 2, α = 4, λ = 2).
Step 2. For each sample, the parameters of the distribution are estimated
under the complete sample.
Step 3. The Newton–Raphson method is used for solving the four non-
linear likelihoods for α, λ, a and b given in (4.4), (4.5), (4.6) and
(4.7), respectively.
Step 4. The ARBiase and MSE of the estimators for the four parameters
for all sample sizes are tabulated.
Step 5. For large sample sizes n = 100, 200 and 300, the Fisher informa-
tion matrix of the estimators are computed using the equations
presented in Section 5.
Step 6. By inverting the Fisher information matrix that was computed in
Step 5, the asymptotic variances and covariances of the estimators
are found.
Step 7. Based on the values of the asymptotic variances and covariances
matrix that were found in Step 6 and on Eq. (6.2), the approxi-
mate confidence limits at 90% for the parameters are computed.
â b̂ α̂ λ̂
n
ARBias MSE ARBias MSE ARBias MSE ARBias MSE
n Parameters â b̂ α̂ λ̂
From these tables, the following observations can be made on the perfor-
mance of the parameter estimation of the BGIED:
We conclude from the previous points that the MLE of the parameters is
a good estimator for a, b and λ.
8. APPLICATIONS
In this section, two sets of data are presented to demonstrate the utility of
using the BGIED. These two sets were investigated by Abouammoh and Alshin-
giti (2009). The GIED was fitted to both of these sets.
17.88, 28.92, 33.0, 41.52, 42.12, 45.60, 48.40, 51.84, 51.96, 54.12, 55.56, 67.80,
68.64, 68.64, 68.88, 84.12, 93.12, 98.64, 105.12, 105.84, 127.92, 128.04, 173.4 .
The beta Generalized Inverted Exponential Distribution... 83
AIC = −2 l(θ̂) + 2p ,
where l(θ̂) denotes the log likelihood function evaluated at the maximum likeli-
hood estimates, p is the number of parameters and n is the sample size. Table 6
lists the values of the K-S statistic and of −2l(θ̂). The K-S goodness-of-fit test
of the BGIED as well as the GIED are the best among all models; accordingly,
the BGIED model can be used to analyse the ball bearing data. Table 7 provides
the MLEs with corresponding standard errors (SEs) of the model parameters.
Table 7: MLEs of the model parameters, the corresponding SEs and the
statistics of the AIC, BIC and CAIC for the ball bearing data.
Estimates Statistics
Model Method
â b̂ α̂ λ̂ AIC BIC CAIC
MLE 20.615 9.427 0.532 7.161
BGIED 235.723 240.265 237.946
SE 0.125 0.279 8.052 0.262
MLE 5.307 129.996
GIED 231.098 233.369 231.698
SE 0.188 0.015
MLE 55.055
IED 245.452 246.587 245.642
SE 0.018
MLE 15.858 3.692 11.858
BIED 234.288 237.695 235.552
SE 0.112 0.508 0.161
The data that is studied in this section was provided by Ed Fuller of the
NICT Ceramics Division in December 1993. It contains polished window strength
data. Fuller et al. (1994) described the use of this set to predict the lifetime for
a glass airplane window. The data are as follows:
18.83, 20.8, 21.657, 23.03, 23.23, 24.05, 24.321, 25.5, 25.52, 25.8, 26.96,
26.77, 26.78, 27.05, 27.67, 29.9, 31.11, 33.2, 33.73, 33.76, 33.89, 34.76,
35.75, 35.91, 36.98, 37.08, 37.09, 39.58, 44.045, 45.29, 45.381 .
The K-S goodness-of-fit test of the BGIED as well as the BIED are the best
among all models; therefore, the BGIED model can be used to study the window
strength data. Table 10 presents the MLEs with corresponding SEs of the model
parameters.
The beta Generalized Inverted Exponential Distribution... 85
Table 10: MLEs of the model parameters, the corresponding SEs and the statistics
of the AIC, BIC and CAIC for the window strength data.
Estimates Statistics
Model Method
â b̂ α̂ λ̂ AIC BIC CAIC
MLE 27.850 7.354 1.978 17.601
BGIED 216.207 221.943 217.745
SE 0.088 0.341 2.401 0.247
MLE 90.855 148.412
GIED 212.454 215.322 212.883
SE 0.011 0.029
MLE 29.215
IED 276.523 277.957 276.661
SE 0.034
MLE 14.506 20.169 26.053
BIED 214.105 218.407 214.994
SE 0.205 0.146 0.166
Finally, we conclude the following from studying the AIC, BIC and CAIC
statistics of the two previous data-sets.
It is noted that the GIED has a smaller value compared with the values of
other models for the two data-sets. The BIED and BGIED follow next. That
indicates that the GIED seems to be a very competitive model for these data.
Because the values of the AIC, BIC and CAIC are approximately equivalent for
the GIED, BIED and BGIED, the BGIED can thus be a good alternative model
for these data, as can the GIED. Alternately, the IED presents the worst fit for
the second dataset. Figure 4 shows the empirical distribution and estimated cdf
of the models for the ball bearing data. Figure 5 shows the empirical distribution
and estimated cdf of the models for the window strength data.
9. CONCLUDING REMARKS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the referees for their useful comments and
suggestions. Additionally, the authors acknowledge with thanks the Deanship
of Scientific Research, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, for the technical and
financial support.
REFERENCES