 Research
 Open Access
 Published:
Further results involving Marshall–Olkin loglogistic distribution: reliability analysis, estimation of the parameter, and applications
SpringerPlus volume 5, Article number: 385 (2016)
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to provide further study of the Marshall–Olkin loglogistic model that was first described by Gui (Appl Math Sci 7:3947–3961, 2013). This model is both useful and practical in areas such as reliability and life testing. Some statistical and reliability properties of this model are presented including moments, reversed hazard rate and mean residual life functions, among others. Maximum likelihood estimation of the parameters of the model is discussed. Finally, a real data set is analyzed and it is observed that the presented model provides a better fit than the loglogistic model.
Background
Many researchers strive to introduce new families of distributions or to generalize existing distributions, which can be used to describe the lifetimes of devices or to describe sets of real data. In Marshall and Olkin (1997), Marshall and Olkin (M–O) introduced a new family of distribution in an attempt to add a parameter to a family of distributions. Let X be a random variable with survival function \({\overline{F}}(x)=1F(x)\), then
is a proper survival function called M–O family of distributions where \({\overline{\alpha }}=1\alpha\). Clearly, Eq. (1) provides a tool to obtain a parametric distribution from existing one. The probability density function (pdf) of the general M–O family, say g(x), takes the form
where f(x) is the pdf corresponding to F(x). Applications, properties and applications of M–O extended distributions can be found in Alshangiti et al. (2014, 2016), Okasha and Kayid (2016), Ghitany et al. (2007), Ristic et al. (2007), ElBassiouny and Abdo (2009, 2010), Srinivasa et al. (2011), Jose and Krishna (2011), Lin and Li (2012), Cordeiro and Lemonte (2012).
Recently, Gui (2013) introduced and studied the M–O log logistic distribution, denoted by M–O loglogistic. The paper’s objectives are to investigate some statistical and reliability properties of M–O loglogistic distribution and to illustrate its applicability in different areas. The paper is organized into five sections. The density and the moment of the model are given in “Extended loglogistic distribution” section. In that section, we provide some new statistical and reliability functions (reversed hazard rate, mean residual life, mean inactivity time, etc.) and discuss their properties. Furthermore, maximum likelihood estimation problems are considered in “Maximum likelihood estimators” section. To indicate the adequacy of the model, some applications using a numerical example and an example with real data are discussed in “Fitting reliability data” section. Finally, in “Conclusion” section, we provide a brief conclusion and some remarks regarding the current and future research (Additional file 1).
Extended loglogistic distribution
In probability and statistics, the loglogistic distribution (LLD) (known as the Fisk distribution in economics) is a continuous probability distribution for a nonnegative random variable. It is used in survival analysis as a parametric model for events whose rate increases initially and decreases later, for example mortality rate from cancer following diagnosis or treatment. It has also been used in hydrology to model stream flow and precipitation, and in economics as a simple model of the distribution of wealth or income. The LLD is obtained by applying the logarithmic transformation to the logistic distribution in much the same way as the lognormal distribution is obtained from normal distribution or the logPearson distribution from the Pearson distribution. The LLD is a special case of Burr’s typeXII and also a special case of the Kappa distribution, that have been applied to precipitation (c.f. Burr 1942; Mielke and Johnson 1973). The survival function of the loglogistic distribution \((\beta ,\gamma )\) takes the form
where \(\gamma >0\), \(\beta >1\). Here \(\beta\) is a shape parameter and \(\gamma\) is a scale parameter. According to Gui (2013), substituting (3) in (1) we get the M–O log logistic distribution, denoted by M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\) with survival function
The corresponding CDF and pdf are obtained respectively as
and
Statistical and reliability properties
In this subsection, we investigate some statistical and reliability properties of the M–O loglogistic. Let \(X\ge 0\) be a random variable representing life with cdf G and rf \({\overline{G}}=1G\) and assume that G admits the probability density g. The reversed hazard rate (RHR) of X is defined by
The RHR function is wellknown and useful tool in reliability theory and in other areas of applied probability and statistics. In addition, the RHR function has been receiving increasing attention in the recent literature of reliability analysis and stochastic modeling. The RHR of a random variable X with M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\) respectively is
The next result provide the behavior of the RHR of the M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\) distribution, and can be verified using elementary calculus.
Lemma 1
Let \(X \sim\) M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\), then the reversed hazard rate is decreasing if \(\beta >1\), independent of \(\alpha\) and \(\gamma\).
Figure 1 illustrates some of the possible shapes of the reversed hazard rate functions of M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\) distribution for different values of the parameter \({\alpha }\).
The conditional reliability function is a measure of the equipment’s performance, indicating the probability of survival during a period of time, knowing that the equipment has not failed yet. This probability can be used to calculate the mean residual lifetime (MRL), and the optimal replacement policy for the equipment. If the probability is calculated while assuming that the equipment has not yet been put to work, it indicates the unconditional reliability of the equipment. When a condition monitoring system is available, analysts are interested in knowing the reliability based on the latest available information on the equipment’s degradation state, i.e. the conditional reliability, while taking into consideration the information obtained from the condition monitoring system. The MRL function is very important in reliability and survival analysis because it describes the aging process. More specifically, if the random variable X represents the life of a component, then MRL is given by
Although the MRL function is defined for any random variable X, it is of particular interest when X is a nonnegative random variable because it can then be thought of as a lifetime of a device, and then represents the conditional expected residual life of the device at time given that the device is still active at time t. In replacement and repair strategies, although the shape of the failure rate function plays an important role, the MRL function is found to be more relevant than the HR function because the former summarizes the entire residual life function, whereas the latter considers only the risk of instantaneous failure at some time. The MRL function of a random variable X with M–O loglogistic is
The value in Eq. (8) can be obtained numerically. Table 1 displays the mean residual life at point \(t=2\) for M–O loglogistic at \(\beta =3,\gamma =2\) and different choices of parameter \(\alpha\).
From the above example, it is noted that the mean residual life is generally increasing for increasing values of \(\alpha\) (Fig. 2).
Another interesting reliability function is the mean inactivity time (MIT) function (also known as the mean past lifetime and the mean waiting time functions). This function is wellknown reliability measure which has several applications in many disciplines such as reliability theory, survival analysis, and actuarial studies. The MIT function of X is defined by
The MIT function of a random variable X with M–O loglogistic is
The value of the function in (9) can be obtained by a numerical calculation. Table 2 displays the mean inactivity time at point \(t=2\) for M–O loglogistic at \(\beta =3, \gamma =2\) and different choices of parameter \(\alpha\) (Additional file 2).
From the above example, it is noted that the mean inactivity time is generally decreasing for increasing values of \(\alpha\) (Fig. 3).
Recently, a reliability measure called strong mean inactivity time (SMIT) function has been introduced and studied (see Kayid and Izadkhah 2014). The SMIT function of a random variable X with M–O loglogistic is
Table 3 displays the strong mean inactivity time at point \(t=2\) for M–O loglogistic at \(\beta =3,\gamma =2\) and different choices of parameter \(\alpha\) (Additional file 3).
From the above example, it is noted that the strong mean inactivity time is generally decreasing for increasing values of \(\alpha\) (Fig. 4).
Mean, variance
We consider a random variable X with M–O loglogistic (\(\alpha\), \(\beta\), \(\gamma\)). The mean and variance are given, respectively, by
and
Hence
In general, the last integrals cannot be given explicitly in terms of \(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma\). The mean E(X) and the variance Var(X) of M–O loglogistic are shown graphically in Figs. 5 and 6 for different value of \(\alpha\) and \(\beta =3\), \(\gamma =2\). These figures show the mean and variance increase as the value of \(\alpha\) increases.
Median
Let X be a random variable with M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\). The median of this distribution is the value m that satisfies
Table 4 displays the median for M–O loglogistic at \(\beta =2\), \(\gamma =0.2\) and different choices of parameter \(\alpha\). It is noted that the median is generally increasing for increasing values of \(\alpha\).
Renyi entropy
Entropy has been used in various situations in science and engineering. The entropy of a random variable X with density function g(x) is a measure of variation of the uncertainty. The Renyi entropy of order \(\delta\) is defined by
Let X be a random variable with M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\). The corresponding Renyi entropy is obtained as
Table 5 displays the Renyi entropy for M–O loglogistic at \(\delta =3, \beta =1.5,\gamma =1\) and different choices of the parameter \(\alpha\). It is noted that the Renyi entropy is generally increasing for increasing values of \(\alpha\).
Maximum likelihood estimators
In statistics, maximumlikelihood estimation (MLE) is a method of estimating the parameters of a statistical model. When applied to a data set and given a statistical model, MLE provides estimates for the model’s parameters. The method of maximum likelihood corresponds to many wellknown estimation methods in statistics.
Let \(X_{1},\ldots ,X_{n}\) be a random sample from M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\), the likelihood function is given by
The logarithm of the likelihood function is then given by
The maximum likelihood estimators (MLEs) of \(\alpha ,\beta\) and \(\gamma\) can be obtained by solving the nonlinear equations
There is no explicit solution for Eqs. (16)–(18), so they need to be solved numerically. For a given known scale parameter \((\gamma =1),\) 1000 different samples are simulated from M–O loglogistic with different sizes and different values of the scale parameter \(\alpha\). We studied the behavior of the MLEs from unknown scale parameter \(\alpha\) and shape parameter \(\beta\). The values of \(\alpha\) are taken as 0.8, 1.5, and 2.5, while the value of \(\beta\) is 2. Tables 6 and 7 represent MLEs of parameter \(\alpha\) and \(\beta\), respectively.
From Table 6 it is observed that the estimate, mean square error and the bias of the MLE of the parameter \(\alpha\) are decreasing when the sample size(n) is increasing. From Table 7 it is observed that the estimate, mean square errors, and the bias of the MLE of the parameter \(\beta\) are decreasing when the sample size (n) is increasing. The second derivatives of (16)–(18) are
If we denote the MLE of \(\theta =(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\) by \(\hat{\theta } =( \hat{\alpha },\hat{\beta },\hat{\gamma })\), the observed information matrix is then given by
Hence the variance covariance matrix would be \(I^{1}( \theta )\). The approximate \((1\delta )100\,\%\) confidence intervals (CIs) for the parameters \(\alpha\), \(\beta\) and \(\gamma\) are \(\hat{\alpha }\pm Z_{\frac{ \delta }{2}}V(\hat{\alpha })\), \(\hat{\beta }\pm Z_{\frac{\delta }{ 2}}V(\hat{\beta })\) and \(\hat{\gamma }\pm Z_{\frac{\delta }{2} }V( \hat{\gamma })\) respectively, where \(V(\hat{\alpha } )\), \(V(\hat{\beta })\) and \(V( \hat{\gamma })\) are the variances of \(\hat{\alpha }\), \(\hat{\beta }\) and \(\hat{\gamma }\), which are given by the diagonal elements of \(I^{1}(\theta )\), and \(Z_{\frac{\delta }{2}}\) is the upper \((\delta {/}2)\) percentile of standard normal distribution.
Fitting reliability data
In this section, we provide two data sets analysis to show how the model works in practice.
First data set
The first data set given in Gupta et al. (1999) is about days of survival for lung cancer patients
Data set
389  18  22  10  112  63  100  13  151  467 
162  117  122  33  42  99  283  80  314  112 
Some properties of the data set were computed in Table 8.
From the above table, it is clear that the distribution of this data set is positively skewed right and leptokurtic. The parameter of the sample is estimated numerically. We used Eqs. (16)–(18) to obtain MLEs estimate and the results are given in Table 9.
If we want to test if this data fits the M–O loglogistic \((\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )\), our hypotheses is \(H_{0}:F\) = F _{M–O loglogistic} versus \(H_{1}:F\ne\) F _{M–O loglogistic}. We use the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K–S) distances between the empirical distribution function and the fitted distribution function to determine the appropriateness of the model. K–S at 95 % CIs value and the corresponding p value are presented in Table 10.
The small K–S distance and the large p value for the test indicate this data fits the M–O loglogistic quite well. Also we use likelihood ratio test (LRT) to determine the appropriateness of the model. The hypotheses are as follows:
The loglikelihood value, likelihood ratio statistic \(( \Lambda )\) and corresponding p value are presented in Table 11.
We note that the calculated LRT statistic is greater than the critical point for this test, which is 6.635, and also that the p value is very small. According to the LRT, we conclude that this data fits the M–O loglogistic much better than the loglogistic distribution.
Second data set
The second data set obtained from www.isixigma.com represents a cycle time of a process.
Data set
10  13  13  14  14  15  15  16  25  26  26  27  38  53 
17  17  17  17  18  18  18  19  27  27  28  28  42  
21  21  21  22  22  23  24  25  30  34  35  35  42 
Some properties of the data set were computed in Table 12.
From the above table, it’s clear that the distribution of this data set is positively skewed right and leptokurtic. The parameter of the sample is estimated numerically. We used Eqs. (16)–(18) to obtain MLEs estimate and the results are given in Table 13.
We want to test if these data fit the M–O loglogistic or not, our hypotheses is \(H_{0}:F\) = F _{M–O loglogistic} versus \(H_{1}:F\ne\) F _{M–O loglogistic}. We use the K–S distances between the empirical distribution function and the fitted distribution function to determine the appropriateness of the model. K–S value at 99 % CIs and the corresponding p value are presented in Table 14.
The small K–S distance and the large pvalue for the test indicate that this data fits the M–O loglogistic quite well. Also we use LRT to determine the appropriateness of the model. The hypotheses are as follow:
Loglikelihood value, likelihood ratio statistic \((\Lambda )\) and corresponding p value are presented in Table 15.
We note that the calculated LRT statistic is greater than the critical point for this test, which is 6.635, and also that the p value is very small. According to the LRT, we conclude this data fits the M–O loglogistic much better than the loglogistic distribution.
Conclusion
In this paper, an extended model based on loglogistic distribution is investigated. Some reliability and statistical properties of this model are obtained. Through numerical simulation, the MLE of the parameters are calculated and discussed. Finally, two sets of real data are fitted to this model and is shown to be appropriate. Further properties and applications of the model can be considered in the future of this research. In particular, the following topics are interesting and still remain as open problems:

1.
Discuss the Bayesian analysis of the model.

2.
Introduce and study a new class of weighted M–O bivariate loglogistic distribution.
References
Alshangiti AM, Kayid M, M Almulhim (2016) Reliability analysis of extended generalized inverted exponential distribution with applications. J Syst Eng Electron (in press)
Alshangiti AM, Kayid M, Alarfaj B (2014) A new family of Marshall–Olkin extended distributions. J Comput Appl Math 271:369–379
Burr IW (1942) Cumulative frequency functions. Ann Math Stat 13:215–232
Cordeiro GM, Lemonte AJ (2012) On the Marshall–Olkin extended Weibull distribution. Stat Pap. doi:10.1007/s0036201204318
ElBassiouny AH, Abdo NF (2009) Reliability properties of extended Makeham distribution. Comput Methods Sci Technol 15:143–149
ElBassiouny AH, Abdo NF (2010) Reliability properties of seven parameters Burr XII distribution. Comput Methods Sci Technol 16:127–133
Ghitany ME, AlAwadhi FA, Alkhalfan LA (2007) Marshall–Olkin extended Lomax distribution and its application to censored data. Commun Stat Theory Methods 36:1855–1866
Gui W (2013) Marshall Olkin extended log logistic distribution and its application in minification process. Appl Math Sci 7:3947–3961
Gupta RC, Akman O, Lvin S (1999) A study of loglogistic model in survival analysis. Biom J 41:431–443
Jose K, Krishna E (2011) Marshall–Olkin extended uniform distribution. Probab Stat Forum 4:78–88
Kayid M, Izadkhah S (2014) Mean inactivity time function, associated orderings and classes of life distribution. IEEE Trans Reliab 63:593–602
Lin J, Li X (2012) Multivariate generalized MarshallOlkin distributions and copulas. Methodol Comput Appl Probab. doi:10.1007/s1100901292974
Marshall AW, Olkin I (1997) A new method for adding a parameter to a family of distributions with application to the exponential and Weibull families. Biometrika 84:641–652
Mielke PW, Johnson ES (1973) Threeparameter kappa distribution maximum likelihood estimates and likelihood ratio tests. Mon Weather Rev 101:701–709
Okasha H, Kayid M (2016) A new family of Marshall–Olkin extended generalized linear exponential distribution. J Comput Appl Math 296:576–592
Ristic M, Jose K, Ancy J (2007) A Marshall–Olkin gamma distribution and minification process. Stress Anxiety Res Soc 11:107–117
Srinivasa GR, Ghitany ME, Kantam RL (2011) An economic reliability test plan for Marshall–Olkin extended exponential distribution. Appl Math Sci 5:103–112
Authors’ contributions
All authors contributed equally to this work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgements
This research project was supported by a grant from the “Research Center of the Female Scientific and Medical Colleges” , Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University.
Competing interests
All authors declare that there is no competing interests regarding the publication of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Alshangiti, A.M., Kayid, M. & Alarfaj, B. Further results involving Marshall–Olkin loglogistic distribution: reliability analysis, estimation of the parameter, and applications. SpringerPlus 5, 385 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s400640162007x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s400640162007x
Keywords
 Marshall–Olkin
 Reversed hazard rate function
 Mean residual life function
 Mean inactivity time function
 Maximum likelihood estimates
 Applications