Talk:Process capability index

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2011; 2015; 2016; 2017;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Business C‑class Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Statistics C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

---

Table for sigma levels

Either this table, or the table in the wikipedia article with the following link is wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma#Sigma_levels

I am not an expert, so please someone revise it. --59.66.122.148 (talk) 13:08, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, they're correct. For process capability to be valid, the process must be stable, so yields of Φ(sigma level) - Φ(-sigma level) as given in the table (in the article coupled with this talk page) are correct. As the Six Sigma article indicates, the yields presented there represent the worst case deterioration of 1.5σ before a control chart is expected to catch the shift or drift, so yields of Φ(sigma level - 1.5) - Φ(-sigma level - 1.5) (for a shift or drift upward; a shift or drift downward is equivalent—you can do the math) are correct in that article. No action required. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 10:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Example shown has a std. deviation that seems to not match chart data. Mu hat estimate (98.94) is correct, but estimated chart data std. deviation is ~0.869 (unbiased) or ~0.842 (std. population deviation), not 1.03, as stated.

..unless I am missing something or a different method is used for this? Any comments/clarification very welcomed and appreciated.

165.225.34.90 (talk) 23:09, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing

The definitions of Cp, Cpk here are exactly the same as for Pp, Ppk in the article Process performance index. Are they meant to be the same and just used under different conditions (under statistical control, not under statistical control)? Or are they meant to be different? A statement about this is required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.13.68.110 (talk) 06:55, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]