cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
The Discovery Summit 2025 Call for Content is open! Submit an abstract today to present at our premier analytics conference.
See how to use to use Text Explorer to glean valuable information from text data at April 25 webinar.
Choose Language Hide Translation Bar
View Original Published Thread

80% z-value : 1.3?

MikeKim
Level IV

MikeKim_0-1699837785773.png

Well, above is the 415page of Pharmaceutical Quality by Desing Using JMP.
In above 90% at the last line is the Spec limit (LSL).

I am confusing the 1.3 looks like ensuring 90% Confidence. (1.282)

Can someone say that using 1.3 and this is 80% confidence?

 

I am sorry for the confusing question and many, but please help me.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
MRB3855
Super User


Re: 80% z-value : 1.3?

Hi @MikeKim : The 1.282 is correct for a one-sided 90% interval. And the z-value for a one-sided 90% bound is the same as the z-value for an 80% two-sided interval. So, while the page you reference is not worded very well (and exposes other issues that may be debated), a one-sided bound is appropriate for setting release limits (for a one-sided spec), and 1.282 is the right number for a 90% one-sided bound. For clarity, It should have been written referencing a one-sided bound (90%) rather than two-sided interval (80%), even though the z-value is the same. 

For more detail on this broad subject:

https://alfresco-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/alfresco_images/pharma/2019/01/15/7b232584-09a9-4472-...

 

View solution in original post

1 REPLY 1
MRB3855
Super User


Re: 80% z-value : 1.3?

Hi @MikeKim : The 1.282 is correct for a one-sided 90% interval. And the z-value for a one-sided 90% bound is the same as the z-value for an 80% two-sided interval. So, while the page you reference is not worded very well (and exposes other issues that may be debated), a one-sided bound is appropriate for setting release limits (for a one-sided spec), and 1.282 is the right number for a 90% one-sided bound. For clarity, It should have been written referencing a one-sided bound (90%) rather than two-sided interval (80%), even though the z-value is the same. 

For more detail on this broad subject:

https://alfresco-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/alfresco_images/pharma/2019/01/15/7b232584-09a9-4472-...