RE: Prediction

Subject: RE: Prediction
From: "John K. Balor" <balor1999@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 02:43:43 -0700 (PDT)
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=IST0I10haUSlquIMNAP62HNjIXW5nTXy0QaG3Np4/tnqw8dTTaZKGB6rOshu9wYqtozvLiNYo4evQmsfSOyYEVl4WXUCuc0vBQOxmJXi0xPbOd1mXL62A2euF7SgOlPE1PjDWBCf7H7WWSCrym3dwNrdnRlpnHWo7Gp5fIy3QSI= ;

Alan suggested only applying SPC for raw data, not on indicators like the number of defects.  As the number of defects should be zero, this sounds reasonable, but I have still found counting defects to be useful.  For instance, the number of times an indicator goes beyond the SPC limits is an interesting measurement that can be used for comparing all processes in a Pareto diagram, helping out deciding which process to focus on.
 
John

References:
- RE: Prediction
  - From: "Alan Meekings" <alan@landmarkconsulting.co.uk>

Prev by Date: Re: Scientific Method
Next by Date: SV: Dana Meadows and prediction
Previous by thread: RE: Prediction
Next by thread: RE: prediction
Indexes:

DEN Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Author Index