Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:00:40.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The hazard and vitality measures of ageing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

Joseph Kupka  and
Sonny Loo
Joseph Kupka
Affiliation:
Monash University
Sonny Loo*
Affiliation:
Monash University
*
∗Postal address for both authors: Department of Mathematics, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new measure of the ageing process called the vitality measure is introduced. It measures the ‘vitality' of a time period in terms of the increase in average lifespan which results from surviving that time period. Apart from intrinsic interest, the vitality measure clarifies the relationship between the familiar properties of increasing hazard and decreasing mean residual life. The main theorem asserts that increasing hazard is equivalent to the requirement that mean residual life decreases faster than vitality. It is also shown for general (i.e. not necessarily absolutely continuous) distributions that the properties of increasing hazard, increasing failure rate, and increasing probability of ‘sudden death' are all equivalent.

Keywords

MEAN RESIDUAL LIFEIHRDMRL
Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Applied Probability , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 532 - 542
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 1989 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Balkema, A. A. and De Haan, L. (1974) Residual life time at great age. Ann. Prob. 2, 792–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Barlow, R. E. and Proschan, F. (1965) Mathematical Theory of Reliability. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
[3] Barlow, R. E. and Proschan, F. (1975) Statistical Theory of Reliability and Life Testing. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
[4] Bryson, M. C. and Siddiqui, M. M. (1969) Some criteria for aging. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 64, 1472–1483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Cox, D. R. (1972) Regression models and life-tables. J. R. Statist. Soc. B 34, 187–202.Google Scholar
[6] Hollander, M. and Proschan, F. (1975) Tests for the mean residual life. Biometrika 62, 585–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Knight, W. R. (1959) Exponential and Subexponential Distributions in Statistical Life Testing. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
[8] Kotz, S. and Shanbhag, D. N. (1980) Some new approaches to probability distributions. Adv. Appl. Prob. 12, 903–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Lee, L. and Thompson, W. A. (1976) Failure rate — a unified approach. J. Appl. Prob. 13, 176–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Loeve, ?. (1963) Probability Theory, 3rd edn. Van Nostrand, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
[11] Loo, S. G. and Kupka, J. G. (1986) Differentiability and monotonicity of the conditional mean function. SCIMA 15, 77–89.Google Scholar
[12] Loo, S. G. and Kupka, J. G. (1987) An integral identity for the conditional mean function with applications. SCIMA 16, 37–46.Google Scholar
[13] Meilijson, I. (1972) Limiting properties of the residual life time function. Ann. Math. Statist. 43, 354–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14] Shanbhag, D. N. (1979) Some refinements in distribution theory. Sankhya A 41, 252–262.Google Scholar
[15] Watson, G. S. and Wells, W. T. (1961) On the possibility of improving the mean useful life of items by eliminating those with short lives. Technometrics 3, 281–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar