arXiv:1704.06329v1 [] 20 Apr 2017

Stochastic comparisons of series and parallel systems
with heterogeneous components
Esmaeil Bashkara , Hamzeh Torabia,∗, Majid Asadib
a

b

Department of Statistics, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
Department of Statistics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract
In this paper, we discuss stochastic comparisons of parallel systems with
independent heterogeneous exponentiated Nadarajah-Haghighi (ENH) components in terms of the usual stochastic order, dispersive order, convex transform order and the likelihood ratio order. In the presence of the Archimedean
copula, we study stochastic comparison of series dependent systems in terms
of the usual stochastic order. Due to the great flexibility of the failure rate
function of the ENH, it thus provides a good alternative to many existing
life distributions in modeling positive real data sets in practice. In particular, it can be an interesting alternative to the well-known three-parameter
exponentiated Weibull (EW) distribution.
Keywords: Exponentiated Nadarajah-Haghighi distribution, Stochastic
ordering, Majorization, Parallel system, Series system.
1. Introduction
Let X1:n ≤ . . . ≤ Xn:n denote the order statistics arising from random
variables X1 , . . . , Xn . Order statistics play a prominent rule in the reliability
theory, life testing, operations research and other related areas. In reliability
theory, the kth order statistic coresponds to the lifetime of a (n − k + 1)out-of-n system. In particular, X1:n and Xn:n correspond to the lifetimes
of series and parallel systems, respectively. Various researchers have studied
the stochastic comparisons for the lifetimes of the series and parallel systems.
∗

Corresponding author at: Department of Statistics, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.
Email address: htorabi@yazd.ac.ir (Hamzeh Torabi)

Preprint submitted to Elsevier

April 24, 2017

For example [10], [6], [22], [14], [23] and [4] deal with the case of heterogeneous Weibull distributions, [7] and [11] deal with the case of heterogeneous
exponentiated Weibull (EW) distributions, [1] deals with the case of heterogeneous generalized exponential (GE) distributions and [8] deals with the
case of heterogeneous Frèchet distributions. A recent review on the topic
can be also found in [2].
A new generalization of the exponential distribution as an alternative to
the gamma, Weibull and GE distributions was proposed by Nadarajah and
Haghighi [19]. Its cumulative function is given by
F (x) = 1 − exp{1 − (1 + λx)α },

x > 0,

(1)

where λ > 0 is the scale parameter, and α > 0 is the shape parameter.
Lemonte [12] proposed a new three-parameter generalization of the exponential distribution on the basis of the distribution proposed by Nadarajah and
Haghighi [19]. The new family of distributions is rather simple and is constructed by raising the cumulative function given in Eq. (1) to an arbitrary
power, β > 0 say. The new cumulative function is given by
G(x) = [1 − exp{1 − (1 + λx)α }]β ,

x > 0,

(2)

where the parameters α > 0 and β > 0 control the shapes of the distribution, and the parameter λ > 0 is the scale parameter. We shall refer
to the new distribution given in (2) as the exponentiated NH (ENH) distribution. If a random variable X has the ENH distribution, then we write
X ∼ ENH(α, λ, β). Clearly, if β = 1, the ENH distribution reduces to the NH
distribution. For α = 1, we obtain the GE distribution proposed by Gupta
and Kundu [9]. We have the exponential distribution when α = β = 1.
Similarly to the exponentiated Weibull model, the ENH failure rate function can have the following four forms depending on its shape parameters:
(i) increasing; (ii) decreasing; (iii) unimodal (upside-down bathtub); (iv)
bathtub-shaped. Therefore, it can be used quite effectively in analyzing lifetime data. Additionally, the new ENH model can be used as an alternative
to the EW distribution constructed by Mudholkar and Srivastava [18]. In
Section 3, we discuss stochastic comparisons of parallel systems with independent heterogeneous ENH components in terms of the usual stochastic
order, dispersive order, convex transform order and the likelihood ratio order.
In the presence of the Archimedean copula, we study stochastic comparison
2

of series dependent systems in terms of the usual stochastic order. To continue our discussion, we need definitions of some stochastic orders and the
concept of majorization which is given in Section 2 of the paper.
2. The basic definitions and some prerequisites
In this section, we recall some notions of stochastic orders, majorization
and related orders and some useful lemmas, which are helpful for proving our
main results. Throughout this paper, we use the notations R = (−∞, +∞)
and R++ = (0, +∞) and the term increasing means nondecreasing and decreasing means nonincreasing.
Let X and Y be two non-negative random variables with distribution
functions F and G, density functions f and g, the survival functions F̄ =
1 − F and Ḡ = 1 − G, the right continuous inverses1 F −1 and G−1 of F and
G, and hazard rate functions hF = F̄f and hG = Ḡg , respectively.
The following definition introduces some well-known orders that compare
skewness of probability distributions.
Definition 2.1. X is said to be smaller than Y in the
(i) convex transform order denoted by X ≤c Y if G−1 F (x) is convex in
x ≥ 0;
(ii) Lorenz order denoted by X ≤Lorenz Y if
1
E(X)

Z

0

F −1 (u)

1
xdx ≥
E(Y )

Z

G−1 (u)

xdx,

∀u ∈ (0, 1].

(3)

0

The convex transform order implies the Lorenz order which, in turn,
implies the order between the corresponding the coefficients of variations.
The following definition gives some well-known orders that compare the
dispersion of two random variables.
Definition 2.2. X is said to be smaller than Y in the
(i) dispersive order, denoted by X ≤disp Y , if F −1 (β)−F −1 (α) ≤ G−1 (β)−
G−1 (α) for all 0 < α ≤ β < 1,
1

The right continuous inverse of an increasing function h is defined as h−1 (u) = sup{x ∈
R : h(x) ≤ u}

3

(ii) right-spread order, denoted by X ≤RS Y , if
Z ∞
Z ∞
F̄ (x)dx ≤
Ḡ(x)dx,
F −1 (u)

∀u ∈ (0, 1).

(4)

G−1 (u)

It is well-known that the dispersive order implies the right-spread order
which, in turn, implies the order between the corresponding variances.
The next definition introduces some well-known orders that compare the
magnitude of two random variables.
Definition 2.3. X is said to be smaller than Y in the
(i) stochastic order, denoted by X ≤st Y , if F̄ (x) ≤ Ḡ(x) for all x;
(ii) likelihood ratio order, denoted by X ≤lr Y , if g(x)/f (x) is increasing
in x ∈ R++ ;
(iii) hazard rate order, denoted by X ≤hr Y , if hF (x) ≥ hG (x) for all x.
Note that the likelihood ratio order implies the hazard rate order, and
the hazard rate order implies the usual stochastic order. Moreover, for nonnegative random variables, the dispersive order implies the usual stochastic
order. For a comprehensive discussion on various stochastic orderings, one
may refer to [21] and [15].
A real function φ is n-monotone on (a, b) ⊆ (−∞, +∞) if (−1)n−2 φ(n−2)
is decreasing and convex in (a, b) and (−1)k φ(k) (x) ≥ 0 for all x ∈ (a, b), k =
0, 1, . . . , n − 2, in which φ(i) (.) is the ith derivative of φ(.). For a n-monotone
(n ≥ 2) function φ : [0, +∞) −→ [0, 1] with φ(0) = 1 and limx→+∞ φ(x) = 0,
let ψ = φ−1 be the pseudo-inverse, then
Cφ (u1, . . . , un ) = φ(ψ(u1) + . . . + ψ(un )),

for all ui ∈ [0, 1], i = 1, . . . , n,

is called an Archimedean copula with the generator φ. Archimedean copulas cover a wide range of dependence structures including the independence
copula with the generator φ(t) = e−t . For more on Archimedean copulas,
readers may refer to [20] and [17].
The concepts of majorization of vectors and Schur convexity of functions
will also be needed. For some extensive and comprehensive discussions on the
theory of these orders and their applications, one can see [16]. Let us recall
that the notation x(1) ≤ x(2) ≤ ... ≤ x(n) is used to denote the increasing
arrangement of the components of the vector x = (x1 , . . . , xn ).
4

Definition 2.4. The vector x is said to be
(i) weakly
submajorized by the vector y (denoted by x w y) if
Pn
i=j y(i) for all j = 1, . . . , n,

Pn

x(i) ≤

(ii) weakly supermajorized by the vector y (denoted by x  y) if
Pj
i=1 y(i) for all j = 1, . . . , n,

Pj

x(i) ≥

Pn

yi and

w

m

(iii) majorized by the vector y (denoted by x  y) if
Pj
Pj
x
≥
(i)
i=1 y(i) for all j = 1, . . . , n − 1.
i=1

Pn

i=1

xi =

i=j

i=1

i=1

Definition 2.5. A real valued function ϕ defined on a set A ⊆ Rn is said
to be Schur-convex (Schur-concave) on A if
m

xy

on A =⇒ ϕ(x) ≤ (≥)ϕ(y).
w

Lemma 2.6 ([16], Theorem 3.A.8). For a function l on A ∈ Rn , x w ()y
implies l(x) ≤ l(y) if and only if it is increasing (decreasing) and Schurconvex on A .
3. Main results
Firstly, we introduce the following lemma, which will be needed to prove
our main results.
Lemma 3.1. Let the function g : (1, ∞) −→ (0, ∞) be defined as
g(x) =

xe1−x
.
1 − e1−x

Then g(x) is a decreasing function on (1, ∞).
Proof. It is easy to see that
g ′ (x) =

f (x)
(1 − e1−x )2

where f (x) = e1−x − e2(1−x) − xe1−x = e1−x (1 − x − e1−x ) < 0 for x > 1.
Hence g(x) is a decreasing function on (1, ∞).
5

3.1. Mutually independent samples
In this section, we provide some comparison results on the lifetimes of
parallel systems arising from independent heterogeneous ENH random variables. The following result considers the comparison on the lifetimes of parallel systems in terms of the usual stochastic order with respect to the shape
parameter α.
Theorem 3.2. Let X1 , . . . , Xn (X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗) be independent random variables with Xi ∼ ENH(αi , λ, β) (Xi∗ ∼ ENH(αi∗ , λ, β)), i = 1, . . . , n. Then,
for any λ, β > 0, we have
w

∗
(α1 , . . . , αn ) (α1∗ , . . . , αn∗ ) =⇒ Xn:n ≥st Xn:n
.

Proof. The distribution function of Xn:n can be written as
n
Y
α
[1 − e1−(1+λx) i ]β .
GXn:n (x) =
i=1

Using Lemma 2.6, it is enough to show that the function GXn:n (x) is Schurconcave and increasing in αi ’s. The partial derivatives of GXn:n (x) with
respect to αi is given by
α

∂GXn:n (x)
β log(1 + λx)(1 + λx)αi e1−(1+λx) i
GXn:n (x) ≥ 0,
=
α
∂αi
1 − e1−(1+λx) i
So, we have that GXn:n (x) is increasing in each αi .
To prove its Schur-concavity, it follows from Theorem 3.A.4. in [16] that
we have to show that for i 6= j,


∂GXn:n (x) ∂GXn:n (x)
≤ 0,
(αi − αj )
−
∂αi
∂αj
that is, for i 6= j,
(αi − αj )GXn:n (x)β log(1 + λx)×
αj 
(1 + λx)αj e1−(1+λx)
≤ 0.
(5)
−
α
1 − e1−(1+λx) j
It is obvious that (1 + λx)α is increasing in α. So, from Lemma 3.1, we
α e1−(1+λx)α
is decreasing in α, from
conclude that the composite function (1+λx)
1−e1−(1+λx)α
which it follows that (5) holds. This completes the proof of the required
result.



αi

(1 + λx)αi e1−(1+λx)
α
1 − e1−(1+λx) i

6

We now generalize Theorem 3.2 to a wider range of the shape parameters
as follows.
Theorem 3.3. Let X1 , . . . , Xn (X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗) be independent random variables with Xi ∼ ENH(αi , λ, β) (Xi∗ ∼ ENH(αi∗ , λ, β)), i = 1, . . . , n. Then,
for any λ, β > 0, if (α1 , . . . , αn ) ≤ (α1∗ , . . . , αn∗ ), that is, αi ≤ αi∗ , i = 1, . . . , n,
∗
we have Xn:n ≥st Xn:n
.
Proof. Using the definition of the usual stochastic order and the fact that
GXn:n (x) is increasing in each αi , the required results follow readily.
The following result considers the comparison on the lifetimes of parallel systems in terms of the usual stochastic order when two sets of scale
parameters weakly majorize each other.
Theorem 3.4. Let X1 , . . . , Xn (X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗) be independent random variables with Xi ∼ ENH(α, λi , β) (Xi∗ ∼ ENH(α, λ∗i , β)), i = 1, . . . , n. If
w

∗
0 < α ≤ 1 and (λ1 , . . . , λn )  (λ∗1 , . . . , λ∗n ), then Xn:n ≥st Xn:n
.

Proof. The distribution function of Xn:n can be written as
GXn:n (x) =

n
Y
α
[1 − e1−(1+λi x) ]β .
i=1

Using Lemma 2.6, it is enough to show that the function GXn:n (x) is Schurconcave and increasing in λi ’s. The partial derivatives of GXn:n (x) with
respect to λi is given by
α

∂GXn:n (x)
xαβ(1 + λi x)α−1 e1−(1+λi x)
=
GXn:n (x) ≥ 0,
∂λi
1 − e1−(1+λi x)α
So, GXn:n (x) is increasing in each λi .
To prove its Schur-concavity, it follows from Theorem 3.A.4. in [16] that
we have to show that for i 6= j,


∂GXn:n (x) ∂GXn:n (x)
≤ 0,
−
(λi − λj )
∂λi
∂λj
that is, for i 6= j,
α

α

(1 + λi x)α−1 e1−(1+λi x) (1 + λj x)α−1 e1−(1+λj x)
(λi −λj )GXn:n (x)xαβ
−
α
1 − e1−(1+λi x)α
1 − e1−(1+λj x)




≤ 0.
(6)

7

α−1 1−(1+λi x)α

e
i x)
is decreasing in λi for 0 < α ≤
It is easy to show that (1+λ1−e
1−(1+λi x)α
1, from which it follows that (6) holds. This completes the proof of the
result.

The following theorem, generalizes Theorem 3.4 to a wider range of the
scale parameters.
Theorem 3.5. Let X1 , . . . , Xn (X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗) be independent random variables with Xi ∼ ENH(α, λi , β) (Xi∗ ∼ ENH(α, λ∗i , β)), i = 1, . . . , n. If
0 < α ≤ 1 and (λ1 , . . . , λn ) ≤ (λ∗1 , . . . , λ∗n ), that is, λi ≤ λ∗i , i = 1, . . . , n,
∗
then Xn:n ≥st Xn:n
.
Proof. By using the definition of the usual stochastic order and the fact that
GXn:n (x) is increasing in each λi , the required results follow easily.
Now, we discuss stochastic comparison between the largest order statistics
in the sense of the likelihood ratio order.
Theorem 3.6. Let X1 , . . . , Xn be independent random variables with Xi ∼
ENH(α, λ, βi ) and X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗ be another set of independent random vari∗
∗
ables
λ, βi∗), i = 1, . . . , n. Then, Xn:n ≥lr Xn:n
if and only
Pnwith XiP∼n ENH(α,
∗
if i=1 βi ≥ i=1 βi .
α

Pn

) i=1 βi and
Proof. Xn:n has the distribution function Fn (x) = (1 − e1−(1+λx)
Pn
∗
∗
1−(1+λx)α
) i=1 βi , and the
Xn:n has the distribution function Gn (x) = (1 − e
corresponding density functions are
P
α
α ni=1 βi λ(1 + λx)α−1 e1−(1+λx)
Pn
fn (x) =
,
(1 − e1−(1+λx)α )1− i=1 βi
P
α
α ni=1 βi∗ λ(1 + λx)α−1 e1−(1+λx)
P
x > 0.
gn (x) =
n
∗
(1 − e1−(1+λx)α )1− i=1 βi
∗
Thus,P for x > 0, the ratio of the density functions of Xn:n and Xn:n
is
Pn
Pn
n
α
∗
β
fn (x)
f
(x)
i
n
1−(1+λx)
β
−
β
i=1
i
i=1 i . Therefore,
= Pn β ∗ (1 − e
) i=1
is increasing in
gn (x)
gn (x)
i=1 i
Pn
Pn
∗
x if and only if i=1 βi ≥ i=1 βi .

Theorem 3.7. Let X1 , . . . , Xn be independent random variables with Xi ∼
ENH(α, λ, βi ), and X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗ be another set of independent random variables with Xi∗ ∼ ENH(α, λ, βi∗), i = 1, . . . , n. Then for α < 1 and λ > 0, we
have
n
n
X
X
∗
βi∗ ≤
βi < 1 =⇒ Xn:n ≥disp Xn:n
.
i=1

i=1

8

Proof. From Nadarajah and Haghighi [19],Pit is easy to show that Xn:n has
decreasing hazard rate (DHR) property if ni=1 βi < 1 and α < 1. Now, the
desired result follows from Theorem 3.B.20 of [21] and the fact that likelihood
ratio order implies hazard rate order.
Theorem 3.8. Suppose X1 , . . . , Xn and X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗ are independent samples
with Xi ∼ ENH(α1 , λ1 , βi ), and Xi∗ ∼ ENH(α2 , λ2 , βi∗), i = 1, . . . , n. Then
for α1 ≤ α2 and λ > 0, we have
n
n
X
X
∗
βi =
βi∗ =⇒ Xn:n ≥c Xn:n
.
i=1

i=1

α

Pn

) i=1 βi
Proof. Xn:n has the distribution function FXn:n (x) = (1 − e1−(1+λ1 x) 1 P
n
α
∗
∗
1−(1+λ2 x) 2
∗ (x) = (1 − e
and Xn:n
has the distribution function GXn:n
) i=1 βi .
Note that
1
Pn 1
(1 − log(1 − x i=1 βi )) α1 − 1
−1
FXn:n (x) =
λ1
Pn
Pn
∗
and if i=1 βi = i=1 βi then
α2

(1 + λ2 x) α1 − 1
= h(x)
=
λ1
In order to obtain the required result it suffices to show that h(x) is
convex in x. The first and second partial derivatives h(x) with respect to x,
respectively, are
α2
λ 2 α2
∂h(x)
−1
=
(1 + λ2 x) α1
∂x
λ 1 α1
and
α2
∂ 2 h(x)
λ 2 α2
α2
−2
=
λ2 ( − 1)(1 + λ2 x) α1 .
2
∂x
λ 1 α1
α1
∗ (x))
FX−1n:n (GXn:n

Thus, for any α1 ≤ α2 we immediately observe that
completes the proof of the theorem.

∂ 2 h(x)
∂x2

is positive, which

As a direct consequence of Theorem 3.8, we present the following corollary, which is of independent interest in economics.
Corollary 3.9. Suppose X1 , . . . , Xn and X1∗ , . . . , Xn∗ are independent samples with Xi ∼ ENH(α1 , λ1 , βi ), and Xi∗ ∼ ENH(α2 , λ2 , βi∗ ), i = 1, . . . , n.
Then for α1 ≤ α2 and λ > 0, we have
n
n
X
X
∗
βi =
βi∗ =⇒ Xn:n ≥Lorenz Xn:n
.
i=1

i=1

9

3.2. Dependent samples with Archimedean structure
Recently, some efforts are made to investigate stochastic comparisons on
order statistics of random variables with Archimedean copulas. See, for example, [3], [14], [13] and [5]. In this section, we derive new result on the usual
stochastic order between extreme order statistics of two heterogeneous random vectors with the dependent components having exponentiated scale (ES)
marginals and Archimedean copula structure. Recall that random variable
X belongs to the ES family of distributions if X ∼ H(x) = [G(λx)]α , where
α, λ > 0 and G is called the baseline distribution and is an absolutely continuous distribution function. We denote this family by ES(α, λ). Specifically,
by X ∼ ES(α, λ, φ) we denote the sample having the Archimedean copula
with generator φ and for i = 1, ..., n, Xi ∼ ES(αi , λi ). In the following theorem, for the ES samples with Archimedean survival copulas, we present
the usual stochastic order on the smallest order statistics under weakly
super-majorization order between shape parameters. For X ∼ ES(α, λ, φ)
and X ∗ ∼ ES(α∗ , λ, φ), Bashkar et al. [3] in Theorem 4.1 showed that
w

∗
X1:n ≤st X1:n
if α  α∗ . Theorem 3.10 generalizes the result of [3] to ES
samples with not necessarily a common dependence structure. The smallest
order statistic X1:n of the sample X ∼ ES(α, λ, φ) gets survival function

ḠX1:n (x) = φ

n
X
i=1


ψ(1 − Gαi (λx)) = J(α, λ, x, φ)

(7)

Theorem 3.10. For X ∼ ES(α, λ, φ1 ) and X ∗ ∼ ES(α∗ , λ, φ2), if ψ2 ◦ φ1 is
w

∗
super-additive, then α  α∗ implies X1:n ≤st X1:n
.
∗
Proof. According to Equation (7), X1:n and X1:n
have their respective sur∗
vival functions J(α, λ, x, φ1 ) and J(α , λ, x, φ2) for x ≥ 0.
First we show that J(α, λ, x, φ1) is increasing and Schur-concave function
of αi , i = 1, . . . , n. Since φ1 is decreasing, we have

Pn
αi
F αi (λx) log(F (λx))φ′1
ψ(1
−
F
(λx))
∂J(α, λ, x, φ1 )
i=1
=−
≥ 0,
∂αi
φ′1 (ψ(1 − F αi (λx)))

for all x > 0,
That is, J(α, λ, x, φ1) is increasing in αi for i = 1, . . . , n.

10

To prove its Schur-concavety, it follows from Theorem 3.A.4. in [16] that
we have to show that for i 6= j,
(αi − αj )

∂J(α, λ, x, φ1 ) ∂J(α, λ, x, φ1 ) 
≤ 0,
−
∂αi
∂αj

that is, for i 6= j,
− log(F (λx))φ′1

n
X
i=1




ψ1 (1 − F αi (λx))) (αi − αj )

F αi (λx)
F αj (λx)
−
φ′1 (ψ1 (1 − F αi (λx))) φ′1 (ψ1 (1 − F αj (λx)))

Now, let us consider the function g(α) =



≤ 0.

(8)

F α (λx)
. Taking derivaφ′ (ψ(1 − F α (λx)))

tive with respect to α, we get
sgn

g ′(α) = F α (λx) log(F (λx))φ′ (ψ(1 − F α (λx)))
+

F 2α (λx) log(F (λx)) ′′
φ (ψ(1 − F α (λx))) ≥ 0.
φ′ (ψ(1 − F α (λx)))

Thus, g(α) is increasing with respect to α, from which it follows that (8)
w

holds. According to Lemma 2.6 α  α∗ implies J(α, λ, x, φ1 ) ≤ J(α∗ , λ, x, φ1 ).
On the other hand, since ψ2 ◦ φ1 is super-additive by Lemma A.1. of [13], we
have J(α∗ , λ, x, φ1 ) ≤ J(α∗ , λ, x, φ2 ). So, it holds that
J(α, λ, x, φ1 ) ≤ J(α∗ , λ, x, φ1 ) ≤ J(α∗ , λ, x, φ2 ).
∗
That is, X1:n ≤st X1:n
.

Note that if in Theorem 3.10, we take λ = 1, then we get the following
result for the proportional reversed hazards (PRH) model.
Corollary 3.11. Suppose X ∼ P RH(α, φ1 ) and X ∗ ∼ P RH(α∗, φ2 ) and
w

∗
φ2 ◦ ψ1 is super-additive. Then α  α∗ implies X1:n ≤st X1:n
.

The following corollary immediately follows from the above theorem.
Corollary 3.12. Suppose X ∼ ENH(α, λ, β, φ1 ) and X ∗ ∼ ENH(α, λ, β ∗ , φ2 )
w

∗
and φ2 ◦ ψ1 is super-additive. Then β  β ∗ implies X1:n ≤st X1:n
.

11

4. Conclusions
The failure rate function of the ENH model can be constant, decreasing,
increasing, upside-down bathtub (unimodal) and bathtub-shaped. Due to
the great flexibility of the failure rate function of this model, it thus provides
a good alternative to many existing life distributions in modeling positive real
data sets in practice. In particular, it can be an interesting alternative to the
well-known three-parameter EW distribution. In this paper, we discussed
stochastic comparisons of parallel systems with independent heterogeneous
ENH components in terms of the usual stochastic order, dispersive order,
convex transform order and the likelihood ratio order. In the presence of the
Archimedean copula, we studied stochastic comparison of series dependent
systems in terms of the usual stochastic order.
References
References
[1] Balakrishnan, N., Haidari, A. and Masoumifard, K., 2015. Stochastic
comparisons of series and parallel systems with generalized exponential
components. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 64, 333-348.
[2] Balakrishnan, N., Zhao, P., 2013. Ordering properties of order statistics
from heterogeneous populations: a review with an exphasis on some recent
developments. Probab. Engrg. Inform. Sci. 27, 403-443.
[3] Bashkar, E., Torabi, H. and Roozegar, R., 2017. Stochastic comparisons
of extreme order statistics in the heterogeneous exponentiated scale model.
J. stat. theory appl. (Accepted).
[4] Fang, L. and Balakrishnan, N., 2016. Likelihood ratio order of parallel
systems with heterogeneous Weibull components. Metrika 79, 693-703.
[5] Fang, R., Li, C. and Li, X., 2015. Stochastic comparisons on sample
extremes of dependent and heterogenous observations. Statistics, 1-26.
[6] Fang, L. and Zhang, X., 2013. Stochastic comparisons of series systems
with heterogeneous Weibull components. Statist. Probab. Lett. 83, 16491653.

12

[7] Fang, L. and Zhang, X., 2015. Stochastic comparisons of parallel systems
with exponentiated Weibull components. Statist. Probab. Lett. 97, 25-31.
[8] Gupta, N., Patra, L.K. and Kumar, S., 2015. Stochastic comparisons in
systems with Frèchet distributed components. operat. res. lett. 43, 612-615.
[9] Gupta, R.D., Kundu, D., 1999. Generalized exponential distributions.
Aust. Nz. J. Statist. 41, 173-188.
[10] Khaledi, B.E., Kochar, S.C., 2006. Weibull distribution: some stochastic
comparisons results. J. Statist. Plann. Inference 136, 3121-3129.
[11] Kundu, A. and Chowdhury, S., 2016. Ordering properties of order statistics from heterogeneous exponentiated Weibull models. Statist. Probab.
Lett. 114, 119-127.
[12] Lemonte, A. J., 2013. A new exponential-type distribution with constant, decreasing, increasing, upside-down bathtub and bathtub-shaped
failure rate function. Comput. statist. data anal. 62, 149-170.
[13] Li, X. and Fang, R., 2015. Ordering properties of order statistics from
random variables of Archimedean copulas with applications, J. Multivariate Anal. 133 304-320.
[14] Li, C. and Li, X., 2015. Likelihood ratio order of sample minimum from
heterogeneous Weibull random variables. Statist. Probab. Lett. 97, 46-53.
[15] Li, H. and Li, X., 2013. Stochastic Orders in Reliability and Risk.
Springer, New York.
[16] Marshall, A.W., Olkin, I. and Arnold, B.C., 2011. Inequalities: Theory
of Majorization and its Applications. Springer, New York.
[17] McNeil, A. J. and Nes̆lehová, J. (2009). Multivariate Archimedean Copulas, d-Monotone Functions and ℓ1 -Norm Symmetric Distributions. Ann.
Statist. 3059-3097.
[18] Mudholkar, G.S., Srivastava, D.K., 1993. Exponentiated Weibull family
for analyzing bathtub failure-rate data. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 42, 299302.
[19] Nadarajah, S., Haghighi, F., 2011. An extension of the exponential distribution. Statistics 45, 543-558.
13

[20] Nelsen, R.B., 2006. An introduction to copulas. Springer, New York.
[21] Shaked, M. and Shanthikumar, J.G., 2007. Stochastic Orders. Springer,
New York.
[22] Torrado, N., 2015. Comparisons of smallest order statistics from Weibull
distributions with different scale and shape parameters. J. Korean Stat.
Soc. 44, 68-76.
[23] Torrado, N. and Kochar, S.C., 2015. Stochastic order relations among
parallel systems from Weibull distributions. J. Appl. Probab. 52, 102-1116.

14

