EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Median ranked set sampling with concomitant variables and a comparison with ranked set sampling and regression estimators



Median ranked set sampling with concomitant variables and a comparison with ranked set sampling and regression estimators



Environmetrics. 9(3): 255-267, E



Ranked set sampling (RSS), as suggested by McIntyre (1952), assumes perfect ranking, i.e. without errors in ranking, but for most practical applications it is not easy to rank the units without errors in ranking. As pointed out by Dell and Clutter (1972) there will be a loss in precision due to the errors in ranking the units. To reduce the errors in ranking, Muttlak (1997) suggested using the median ranked set sampling (MRSS). In this study, the MRSS is used to estimate the population mean of a variable of interest when ranking is based on a concomitant variable. The regression estimator uses an auxiliary variable to estimate the population mean of the variable of interest. When one compares the performance of the MRSS estimator to RSS and regression estimators, it turns out that the use of MRSS is more efficient, i.e. gives results with smaller variance than RSS, for all the cases considered. Also the use of MRSS gives much better results in terms of the relative precision compared to the regression estimator for most cases considered in this study unless the correlation between the variable of interest and the auxiliary is more than 90 per cent.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 009005852

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-095x(199805/06)9:3<255::aid-env302>3.0.co;2-2



Related references

Environmental sampling with a concomitant variable: A comparison between ranked set sampling and stratified simple random sampling. Journal of Applied Statistics 23(2-3): 231-256, 1996

Ranked-set sampling with regression-type estimators. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 92(1-2): 181-192, 2001

On stratified bivariate ranked set sampling for regression estimators. Journal of Applied Statistics 42(12): 2571-2583, 2015

Two-layer ranked set sampling with concomitant variables. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 115(1): 45-57, 2003

Goodness-of-fit testing for the inverse Gaussian distribution based on new entropy estimation using ranked set sampling and double ranked set sampling. Environmental Systems Research 1(1), 2012

Best linear unbiased estimators for the simple linear regression model using ranked set sampling. Environmental & Ecological Statistics 6(2): 119-133, June, 1999

Regression estimators in extreme and median ranked set samples. Journal of Applied Statistics 28(8): 1003-1017, 2001

Relative precision of ranked set sampling: A comparison with the regression estimator. Environmetrics 4(4): 399-412, 1993

Estimators for a Poisson parameter using ranked set sampling. Journal of Applied Statistics 28(8): 929-941, 2001

On the inadmissibility of empirical averages as estimators in ranked set sampling. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 36(1): 39-55, 1993

Ratio estimators of the population mean with missing values using ranked set sampling. Environmetrics 26(2): 67-76, 2015

Regression estimator in ranked set sampling. Biometrics 53(3): 1070-1080, 1997

Incorporating prior knowledge in environmental sampling: Ranked set sampling and other double sampling procedures. Environmetrics 13(5-6): 513-521, August-September, 2002

Two-stage cluster sampling with hybrid ranked set sampling in the secondary sampling frame. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods 46(17): 8450-8467, 2017

Median Ranked Set Sampling with Size Biased Probability of Selection. Biometrical Journal 40(4): 455-465, 1998