Table 6 Model comparisons: MSE and R2 for different models for DS-II.
No. | Model name | Estimated parameters | Comparison criteria | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MSE | \(\:{\varvec{R}}^{2}\) | |||
1 | Delayed S-Shaped | \(\:a=101\:,\:b=0.19\) | 32.8 | 0.963 |
2 | GO model | \(\:a=155\:,\:b=0.04\) | 37.2 | 0.969 |
3 | Inflection S-shaped | \(\:a=150\:,\:b=0.04\:,\:\beta\:=0.07\) | 32.3 | 0.967 |
4 | S-shaped change-point | \(\:a=\:121,\:{b}_{1}=0.16\:,\:{b}_{2}=0.10\:\) | 56.4 | 0.943 |
5 | Pham-Zhang | \(\:a=79\:,\:b=\:0.21,\:c=21.88\:,\:\alpha\:=0.19\:,\:\beta\:=0.16\) | 36.8 | 0.965 |
6 | Pure error generation | \(\:a=115\:,\:b=0.05\:,\:\alpha\:=0.27\) | 34.7 | 0.963 |
7 | Roy-Mahapatra-Dey model | \(\:a=\:149,\:b=0.20\:,\:\alpha\:=0.97\:,\:\beta\:=0.18\) | 38.4 | 0.961 |
8 | Yamada Exponential | \(\:a=211\:,\:\alpha\:=1.98\:,\:\beta\:=0.01\:,\:\gamma\:=1.10\) | 32.3 | 0.969 |
9 | Yamada Imperfect 1 | \(\:a=113\:,\:b=\:0.05,\:\alpha\:=0.01\) | 32.6 | 0.968 |
10 | Yamada Imperfect 2 | \(\:a=6\:,\:b=1.12\:,\:\alpha\:=\)0.73 | 55.7 | 0.941 |
11 | Yamada Rayleigh model | \(\:a=176\:,\:\alpha\:=0.35\:,\:\beta\:=0.01\:,\:\gamma\:=2.10\) | 37.4 | 0.965 |
12 | Proposed Model | \(\:\varvec{N}=\:149,\:{\varvec{b}}_{1}=0.04,\:{\varvec{b}}_{2}=0.001,\) \(\:{\varvec{\alpha\:}}_{1}=0.005,\:{\varvec{\alpha\:}}_{2}=0.001,\:{\varvec{\upsigma\:}}_{1}=0.298,\:{\varvec{\upsigma\:}}_{2}=0.463\) | 31.9 | 0.970 |
