A Nonconformity Ratio Based Desirability Function for Capability Assessment

  • Ramzi TalmoudiEmail author
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)


The objective of this paper is to provide a process capability index structure, which respects “the higher the better” rule even when the underlying distribution of the quality characteristic not the normal distribution. An estimator of the univariate capability index is proposed and its statistical properties are studied using Taylor series expansion to monitor an exponential and a lognormal distribution. The used approximation shows that the estimator is unbiased and convergent when the underlying distribution is the exponential one. However, like classical indices, the estimator is biased for the lognormal distribution. A comparative study is carried out with some process capability indices from the literature designed to deal with non- normality. The proposed index performs better than existing indices considering “the higher the better” rule as a benchmark. Finally, a bootstrap confidence interval is implemented for capability judgement and a multivariate extension of the index is introduced.


  1. Chan, L.K., Cheng, S.W., & Spiring, F.A. (1988). A new measure of process capability: \(C_{pm}\), Journal of Quality Technology, 20(3), 162–173.Google Scholar
  2. Choi, I.S., & Bai, D.S. (1996). Process capability indices for skewed populations. In Proceedings of 20th International Conference on Computer and Industrial Engineering (pp. 1211–1214).Google Scholar
  3. Derringer, G.C. (1994). A balancing act: Optimizing a product’s properties. Quality Progress, 51–58.Google Scholar
  4. Derringer, G. C., & Suich, D. (1980). Simultaneous optimization of several response variables. Journal of Quality Technology, 12(4), 214–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Harrington, E. (1965). The desirability function. Industrial Quality Control, 494–498.Google Scholar
  6. Hsiang, T. C., & Taguchi, G. (1985). A tutorial on quality control and assurance- The Taguchi methods, ASA annual meeting Nevada: Las Vegas.Google Scholar
  7. Jessenberger, J. (1999). Prozesshäufigkeitsindizes in der Qualitätssicherung, Libri Books on Demand.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson, N.L., Kotz, S., Balakrishnan, N. (1994a). Continuous Univariate Distribution, Wiley Series In Probability And Mathematical Statistics: New York.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, N. L., Kotz, S., & Pearn, W. L. (1994b). Flexible process capability indices. Pakistan Journal of Statistics, 10(1), 23–31.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim, K. J., & Lin, D. K. J. (2000). Simultaneous optimization of mechanical properties of steel by maximizing exponential desirability functions. Applied Statistics, 49(3), 311–325.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Kotz, S., Johnson, N.L. (1993). Process capability indices, Chapman and Hall: London.Google Scholar
  12. Kotz, S., Lovelace, C.R. (1998). Process capability indices in theory and practice, Arnold: London.Google Scholar
  13. Moore, D.S. (1986). Tests of chi-squared type. In R.B. D’Agostino, M.A. Stephens (Eds.), Goodness of fit techniques, Marcel Dekker, Inc: New York.Google Scholar
  14. Pearn, W. L., Kotz, S., & Johnson, N. L. (1992). Distributional and inferential properties of process capability indices. Journal of Quality Technology, 24(4), 216–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wang, F. K., Hubele, N. F., Lawrence, F. P., Miskulin, J. D., & Shahriari, H. (2000). Comparison of three multivariate process capability indices. Journal of Quality Technology, 32(3).Google Scholar
  16. Wright, P. A. (1995). A process capability index sensitive to skewness. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 52, 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Carthage, Faculté des Sciences Economiques et de Gestion de NabeulLaboratoire Environnement Economique et Institutionnel de l’EntrepriseNabeulTunisia

Personalised recommendations