Recurrence Analysis in JMP 18 Standard

[#1]

Hi, all
I am a new member to the community. I am assigned a task to perform recurrence analysis on our data. I never used JMP or did any recurrence analysis. So I will bring some stupid questions for sure.
The data we have are robots repair. We want to see repairs event pattern for the bots and I was told to use recurrence analysis (don't know why).

So we have around 15000 robots, I used the 'bot_id', 'accumulated_transactions', 'site', 'cost', 'bot_type' and 'component' columns. 'Site' includes different location where the robots work. 'cost' is the 0, 1 value ( 1 means a repair, and 0 means the last seen event of the bots). 'component' are different parts under repair. We want to see effect of sites, bot_type, and parts on mcf and repair pattern. I primarily use Log Linear NHPP model.

I have some concerns with the data. We have around 1000 loaner bots that travel around all sites. If I select 'site' column as 'Grouping' role in the analysis to see the MCF for different sites, does it affect the result? My understand is that each site will consider the loaner bot as an independent bot now. Should I exclude those like 1000 loaner bots if I want to 'Grouping' by 'site'?

The data I received have the 'cost' value as 0 at the last event for each site and bot. So if a bot worked in two sites, there will be two 0 values for this bot, each as the last event per site. Does this affect how JMP count active bots when calculate MCF value? My understanding is that 0 cost value means the end of the bot. If there are multiple 0 values for a bot, how is that handled?

I have other questions but want to stop now before this gets too long.
Appreciate you help.

[#2]

Hi, thanks for you fast reply. You did not misunderstand and there are indeed two types of bots and I use bot type in GROUPING effect if I want to see the effect of bot types. My last example is a simple one without site as time covariate just for simple example. No misunderstanding from you and I also understand your concern.

For the money in weight of likelihood function, I think I have the feeling how it works.  Using costs as weights means more expensive events count more in shaping the fitted model, not just in the cumulative total. Now I am not focusing on the math and I will use the money in the cost role. All the best.

[#3]

Thank you again for your reply, @Caozheng0115 -san.

I am relieved to hear it. If you have additional questions related to recurrenct analysis, I would like you to ask again or reply this thread. 

[#4]

Hi, 
Hope you are doing well.
I tested dollar values in the cost column. Since the cost is like scaling/weight of the repair events. It shifted the curve but did not really show anything unexpected. 

Another task is to predict future repairs and cost. Do you think recurrence in JMP is a good way to perform prediction? I have been using the Loglinear NHPP model, but I noticed that the fitted curve converge quickly and will probably do bad prediction. 
I guess I can use Proportional NHPP model. I just feel like I don't have much of the choice and prediction using the recurrence analysis seems not accurate. 

Are there other analysis that I can do the prediction?
Thanks.

[#5]

Dear Cao Zheng-

I just happened to see this thread.  There are some very good learning resources available to you on the JMP web site.  For general reliability, check out Learn JMP - JMP User Community.  For repairable systems analysis, my colleague, Jerry Fish, did a really good webinar.  You can find it using this link:  Analyzing Reliability for Repairable Systems . 

Hope this helps!

best,

Charlie  

[#6]

Hello-
Adding on to Charlie's post-
A ton of great resources at Learn JMP

Check out this link https://community.jmp.com/t5/Learn-JMP-Events/Analyzing-Reliability-for-Non-Repairable-Systems/ec-p/... 

Also this series that includes several segments on Recurrence https://community.jmp.com/t5/Deeper-Dives/A-Deeper-Dive-into-Reliability-Analysis-for-Repairable-Sys... 

[#7]

Hi, yusuke_ono
Hope you are doing well. I thought of something on your reply:

'If you observed until "t", and if the robot failed at that time "t", you do not need to include the last row with Cost=0. Instead, you need to include the last row with Cost=1'

My question is that what if the bots failed before time "t", and went to garbage? Should those bots be included?

In my case,eg. a bot failed at 100 transaction (I am using transaction instead of time) and it was not fixable, and that occurred before my observation. I guess I will fill 1 at transaction 100 for this bot. No 0 will be filled since this bot is not fixable. Am I right? Currently we did not include any bots that failed and not fixed before observation. Let me know if I should include those bots. Thanks.