IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/risrel/v232y2018i1p105-115.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methods for displaying and calibration of Cox proportional hazards models

Author

Listed:
  • Chrianna I Bharat
  • Kevin Murray
  • Edward Cripps
  • Melinda R Hodkiewicz

Abstract

Cox proportional hazards modelling is a widely used technique for determining relationships between observed data and the risk of asset failure when model performance is satisfactory. Cox proportional hazards models possess good explanatory power and are used by asset managers to gain insight into factors influencing asset life. However, validation of Cox proportional hazards models is not straightforward and is seldom considered in the maintenance literature. A comprehensive validation process is a necessary foundation to build trust in the failure models that underpin remaining useful life prediction. This article describes data splitting, model discrimination, misspecification and fit methods necessary to build trust in the ability of a Cox proportional hazards model to predict failures on out-of-sample assets. Specifically, we consider (1) Prognostic Index comparison for training and test sets, (2) Kaplan–Meier curves for different risk bands, (3) hazard ratios across different risk bands and (4) calibration of predictions using cross-validation. A Cox proportional hazards model on an industry data set of water pipe assets is used for illustrative purposes. Furthermore, because we are dealing with a non-statistical managerial audience, we demonstrate how graphical techniques, such as forest plots and nomograms, can be used to present prediction results in an easy to interpret way.

Suggested Citation

  • Chrianna I Bharat & Kevin Murray & Edward Cripps & Melinda R Hodkiewicz, 2018. "Methods for displaying and calibration of Cox proportional hazards models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 232(1), pages 105-115, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:232:y:2018:i:1:p:105-115
    DOI: 10.1177/1748006X17742779
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1748006X17742779
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1748006X17742779?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Samrout, M. & Châtelet, E. & Kouta, R. & Chebbo, N., 2009. "Optimization of maintenance policy using the proportional hazard model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 44-52.
    2. P J Vlok & J L Coetzee & D Banjevic & A K S Jardine & V Makis, 2002. "Optimal component replacement decisions using vibration monitoring and the proportional-hazards model," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(2), pages 193-202, February.
    3. Mithat Gonen & Glenn Heller, 2005. "Concordance probability and discriminatory power in proportional hazards regression," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 92(4), pages 965-970, December.
    4. Viechtbauer, Wolfgang, 2010. "Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 36(i03).
    5. Suwan Park & Chang Choi & Jeong Kim & Cheol Bae, 2010. "Evaluating the Economic Residual Life of Water Pipes Using the Proportional Hazards Model," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(12), pages 3195-3217, September.
    6. D Lin & D Banjevic & A K S Jardine, 2006. "Using principal components in a proportional hazards model with applications in condition-based maintenance," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(8), pages 910-919, August.
    7. Kumar, Dhananjay & Westberg, Ulf, 1997. "Maintenance scheduling under age replacement policy using proportional hazards model and TTT-plotting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 507-515, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Izquierdo, J. & Crespo Márquez, A. & Uribetxebarria, J., 2019. "Dynamic artificial neural network-based reliability considering operational context of assets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 483-493.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. You, Ming-Yi & Li, Hongguang & Meng, Guang, 2011. "Control-limit preventive maintenance policies for components subject to imperfect preventive maintenance and variable operational conditions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(5), pages 590-598.
    2. Si, Xiao-Sheng & Wang, Wenbin & Hu, Chang-Hua & Zhou, Dong-Hua, 2011. "Remaining useful life estimation - A review on the statistical data driven approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Braglia, Marcello & Carmignani, Gionata & Frosolini, Marco & Zammori, Francesco, 2012. "Data classification and MTBF prediction with a multivariate analysis approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 27-35.
    4. XiaoFei, Lu & Min, Liu, 2014. "Hazard rate function in dynamic environment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 50-60.
    5. W Wang, 2011. "Overview of a semi-stochastic filtering approach for residual life estimation with applications in condition based maintenance," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 225(2), pages 185-197, June.
    6. Tian, Zhigang & Liao, Haitao, 2011. "Condition based maintenance optimization for multi-component systems using proportional hazards model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(5), pages 581-589.
    7. Peng, Hao & van Houtum, Geert-Jan, 2016. "Joint optimization of condition-based maintenance and production lot-sizing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 94-107.
    8. Xiang, Yisha, 2013. "Joint optimization of X¯ control chart and preventive maintenance policies: A discrete-time Markov chain approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(2), pages 382-390.
    9. Bart Verkuil & Serpil Atasayi & Marc L Molendijk, 2015. "Workplace Bullying and Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis on Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    10. Francesca Pilotto & Ingolf Kühn & Rita Adrian & Renate Alber & Audrey Alignier & Christopher Andrews & Jaana Bäck & Luc Barbaro & Deborah Beaumont & Natalie Beenaerts & Sue Benham & David S. Boukal & , 2020. "Meta-analysis of multidecadal biodiversity trends in Europe," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:972-988 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Jonas Schmidt & Tammo H. A. Bijmolt, 2020. "Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 499-518, May.
    13. Van den Poel, Dirk & Lariviere, Bart, 2004. "Customer attrition analysis for financial services using proportional hazard models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(1), pages 196-217, August.
    14. Mario Herberz & Tobias Brosch & Ulf J. J. Hahnel, 2020. "Kilo what? Default units increase value sensitivity in joint evaluations of energy efficiency," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 972-988, November.
    15. Lin Lu & Laurent Dercle & Binsheng Zhao & Lawrence H. Schwartz, 2021. "Deep learning for the prediction of early on-treatment response in metastatic colorectal cancer from serial medical imaging," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    16. Lin, Yan-Hui & Li, Yan-Fu & Zio, Enrico, 2018. "A comparison between Monte Carlo simulation and finite-volume scheme for reliability assessment of multi-state physics systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 1-11.
    17. Piers Steel & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Herman Aguinis, 2021. "The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(1), pages 23-44, February.
    18. Nuriye Sancar & Deniz Inan, 2018. "A novel method as a diagnostic tool for the detection of influential observations in the Cox proportional hazards model," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 1253-1266, December.
    19. Guo R. & Ascher H. & Love E., 2001. "Towards Practical and Synthetical Modelling of Repairable Systems," Stochastics and Quality Control, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 147-182, January.
    20. Augusteijn, Hilde Elisabeth Maria & van Aert, Robbie Cornelis Maria & van Assen, Marcel A. L. M., 2021. "Posterior Probabilities of Effect Sizes and Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis: An Intuitive Approach of Dealing with Publication Bias," OSF Preprints avkgj, Center for Open Science.
    21. Georgiou, George K. & Guo, Kan & Naveenkumar, Nithya & Vieira, Ana Paula Alves & Das, J.P., 2020. "PASS theory of intelligence and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:232:y:2018:i:1:p:105-115. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.