Anthony Chirico¹ describes how narrow-limit gauging (NLG, aka compressed limit plans) can reduce enormously the required sample size, and therefore the inspection cost, of a traditional attribute sampling plan.

Now, if you’re familiar with either statistics or J.R.R. Tolkien, I know the title grabbed your attention.

Last month we provided an operational definition of when measurement systems are equivalent in terms of bias.

Ever since sportswriter Henry Chadwick popularized the box score in the 19th century, baseball fans have had a love affair with statistics.

As soon as we have two or more instruments for measuring the same property the question of equivalence raises its head. This paper provides an operational definition of when two or more instruments are equivalent in practice. 

In most healthcare settings, workers attend weekly, monthly, or quarterly meetings where performances are reported, analyzed, and compared to goals in an effort to identify trends.

Within maintenance management, the term MTBF (mean time between failures) is the most important key performance indicator after physical availability.

Managers the world over want to know if things are “in control.” This usually is taken to mean that the process is producing 100-percent conforming product, and to this end an emphasis is placed upon having a good capability or performance index.

During recent visits to Twitter and LinkedIn, I’ve become increasingly shocked by the devolution of the posts to vacuous nonsense.

‘Process Capability: What It Is and How It Helps,” parts one,