Variance Corrected Proportional Hazard Model for the Analysis of Recurrent Multiple Failure Modes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v63.1914Keywords:
VCPH models, multiple type failures, automobile failures, PWP model, information matrix testAbstract
Automobiles do fail repetitively owing to different types of failures. Modeling of such products should concern dissimilar recurrent failure types. Failure types are habitually correlated to each other. This study has utilized variance corrected proportional hazard models (VCPH) for modeling multiple failure occurrences of different failure types of automobiles taking into account the correlated nature of the failures. Though original Cox proportional hazard (PH) models require failure events to be independent, VCPH can handle non independency. In this study, this model is utilized for the analysis of multi-type, multiple occurrences of failures in automobiles, where the assumption of independence among failure times is violated. The VCPH model obtains parameter estimates by first fitting a Cox PH model that ignores the dependence structure and then replaces the naive standard errors with estimates from empirical sandwich variance estimation in order to incorporate the non-independence of times between failures. This study applies the Prentice, Williams and Petersen (PWP) models to model multiple occurrences of different failures in automobiles as proportionality among failure events were well demonstrated when risk interval is taken as ‘gap time’ and since PWP models are specified with a gap time risk interval. The Information Matrix (IM) test of White is applied for the checking of the PH model specification with multivariate failure time data. White’s paper on inference from missspecified models presented the IM test as a test for correct model specification. The objective of the study was to find out how automobile type and type of failure affect the time to failure. Applying the best suitable VCPH model to the data, it was revealed that both automobile and failure type have an impact on timing of failure however this effect doesn’t change over multiple failure occurrences of the automobile. Â
References
Abeysekera, W. and M. Sooriyarachchi, 2009. Use of Schoenfeld’s Global Test to Test the Proportional Hazards Assumption in the Cox Proportional Hazards Model: An Application to a Clinical Study, Journal of the National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka. 37(1): 43–53.
Clayton, D., 1988. The Analysis of Event History Data: A Review of Progress and Outstanding Problems, Statistics in Medicine. 7: 819–841.
Cox, D., 1972. Regression Models and Life Tables, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. 34: 187–220.
Crouchley, R. and A. Pickles, 1993. A Specification Test for Univariate and Multivariate Proportional Hazards Models, BioMetrics. 49: 1067–1076.
Doganaksoy, N., G. Hahn and W. Meeker. 2002. Reliability Analysis by Failure Mode. Quality Progress.
Ezzell, M., K. Land and L. Cohen, 2003. Modeling Multiple Failure Time Data: A Survey of Variance-Corrected Proportional Hazards Models with Empirical Applications to Arrest Data. Sociological Methodology. 33: 111–167.
Hannan, P., X. Shu, D. Weisdorf, and A. Goldman, 1998. Analysis of Failure Times for Multiple Infections Following Bone Marrow Transplantation: An Application of the Multiple Failure Time Proportional Hazards Model. Statistics in Medicine. 17: 2371–2380.
Lee, E., L. Wei, and D. Amato, 1992. Survival Analysis: State of the Art. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 237–247.
Lim, H. J. and X. Zhang, 2011. Additive and Multiplicative Hazards Modeling for Recurrent Event Data Analysis. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 11–101.
Lin, D., 1994. Cox Regression Analysis of Multivariate Failure Time Data: The Marginal Approach, Statistics in Medicine. 13: 2233–2247.
Peña, E. and M. Hollander, Models for Recurrent Events in Reliability and Survival Analysis. 2004 Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. 105–123.
Prentice, R., B. Williams and R. Peterson, 1981, On the Regression Analysis of Multivariate Failure Time Data. Biometrika. 68: 373–379.
Sunethra, A. and M. Sooriyarachchi, 2010. Variance-corrected Proportional Hazard Models for the Analysis of Multiple Failures in Personal Computers. Quality and Reliability Engineering International. 27: 85–97.
Therneau, T., and P. Grambsch. 2000. Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. New York: Springer.
Therneau, T., and S. Hamilton, 1997. rhDNase as an Example of Recurrent Event Analysis. Statistics in Medicine. 16: 2029–2047.
Wei, L., and D. Glidden, 1997. An Overview of Statistical Methods for Multiple Failure Time Data in Clinical Trials. Statistics in Medicine. 16: 833–839.
Wei, L., D. Lin, and L. Weissfeld, 1989. Regression Analysis of Multivariate Incomplete Failure Time Data by Modeling Marginal Distributions, Journal of the American Statistical Association. 84: 1065–1073.
White, H., 1982, Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Misspecified Models. Econometrica. 50: 1–25.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of articles that appear in Jurnal Teknologi belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions, or any other reproductions of similar nature.