# The Exponentiated Exponential-Inverse Weibull Model: Theory and Application to COVID-19 Data in Saudi Arabia

Authors: Majdah Mohammed Badr; Ghaida Sobahi
Journal: Journal of Mathematics
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

The purpose of this study is to introduce a new T-X family lifetime distribution known as exponentiated exponential-inverse Weibull, and we refer to this distribution as EE-IW. The new model’s basic mathematical characteristics are studied. The maximum likelihood (ML) estimator (MLE) approach is used to estimate the parameters. A Monte Carlo simulation is done to examine the behavior of the estimators. Finally, a real-world dataset is utilized to show the utility of the proposed model in many industries and to compare it to well-known distributions.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

In statistical theory, improvement of classical distribution becomes a common practice. Probability distributions are used to model the phenomenon of natural life, but in many situations, there is a need to propose a new model for the better exploration of the data. The recent development in distribution theory stresses on new approaches for introducing new models. The new approaches depend on modifying the baseline by adding one or more parameters, to generalize the existing family. The aim of these is to provide more flexibility or to obtain better fits to the model compared with related distributions.Barreto-Souza et al. [1] discussed the beta generalized exponential (BGE) model, Khan [2] investigated the beta inverse Weibull (BIW) model, Kundu and Howlader [3] studied Bayesian inference of the inverse Weibull (IW) model under type II censored schemes. Gusmao [4] discussed the generalized IW (GIW) distribution, modified IW distribution has been studied by Khan and King [5], Hanook et al. [6] introduced beta IW distribution, Abbas et al. [7] studied the Topp–Leone IW distribution. Elbatal and Muhammed [8] proposed Exponentiated generalized inverse Weibull distribution, and Elbatal et al. [9] introduced the beta generalized IW geometric model. Alkarni et al. [10] studied the half logistic IW. Nadarajah [11] studied the exponentiated exponential (EE) model, and also, Alzaghal et al. [12] defined a new family named “exponentiated T-X distribution”. Some of its characteristics and specific instances are examined, and obtained on t is a nonnegative continuous random variable (RVr) T specified as [0, ∞).In this study, we used the T-X family approach to obtain the EE-IW model. The newly suggested model is formed by combining two models known as theT-X family. The RVr T is the generator of the EE model and IW model. The primary goal of this study is to propose and determine the statistical features of a novel distribution (EE-IW). The hazard function and its many shapes allow it to suit various datasets.The remainder of the paper is arranged as described in the following. Section2 introduces the new model (EE-IW) distribution with some important different characteristics such as the probability density function (pdf), the cumulative function (cdf), the hazard function, and graphs of different values for parameters. The rth moment is discussed in Section 3. The MLE estimators are introduced in Section 4. A simulation study is introduced in Section 5. A real dataset is applied in Section 6. Finally, Section 7 concludes this study.


## 2. The EE-IW Model

In this section, we propose the EE-IW distribution, and we derive density, cumulative, reliability, and hazard functions of the new distribution.Letrt be the pdf of RVr T, then the exponential model of t is(1)rt=βe−βt;β,t>0.The cdf and pdf of the RVrX of the IW model are(2)gx=αx−α−1e−x−α;x>0,α>0,(3)Gx=e−x−α;x>0,α>0.Using the formula in Alzaghal et al. [12], we define the cdf for the EE-IW model for an RVr X as(4)fx=cβgxGxc−11−Gcxβ−1.Inserting (2) and (3) in (4), we get the pdf EE-IW as(5)fx=cαβx−α−1e−cx−α1−e−cx−αβ−1;x>0,c>0,α>0,where c, α, and β are the shape parameters.We can expand the above pdf given in (5) using the binomial expansion as follows:(6)fx=cαβ∑i=0∞−1iβ−1ixr−α+1e−ci+1x−α.The corresponding cdf for the EE-IW model given in (5) is(7)Fx=1−1−e−cx−αβ;β,α,c,x>0.The corresponding reliability of the EE-IW model has the following form:(8)Rx=1−e−cx−αβ;β,α,c,x>0.The corresponding hazard function of the EE-IW model has the following form:(9)hx=cαβx−α−1−e−cx−α1−e−cx−αβ−11−e−cx−αβ.


### 2.1. The Submodels of the EE-IW Distribution

In this section, some special cases of the proposed model are given. Table1 introduces a brief list of the submodels.Table 1
The subdistribution from the EE-IW.
cαβModelCDFReferences√11Exponentiated inverted Weibull (E-IW) distributionFx=e−cx−αFlaih et al. [13]1√1Standard inverted Weibull exponentiated (SIWE) distributionFx=e−x−αFlaih et al. [13]√11Exponentiated standard inverted exponential (ESIE) distributionFx=e−cx−1Flaih et al. [13]1√√Exponentiated Frechet (EF) distributionFx=1−1−e−x−αβBadr [14]√1√Exponentiated exponential (EE) distributionFx=1−e−x−cxβGupta and Kundu [15]From Table1, it can be noticed that the EE-IW reduces to the exponentiated IW (E-IW) model when β = 1. For β = c = 1, it becomes the standard IW exponentiated (SIWE) model. For β = α = 1, it reduces to the exponentiated standard inverted exponential (ESIE) distribution. For α = −1, it becomes the EE model. For c = 1, we get the exponentiated Frechet (EF) distribution.Figures1–4 illustrate the plots of the pdf, cdf, hazard, and reliability functions, respectively.Figure 1
pdf of the EE-IW model.Figure 2
cdf of the EE-IW model.Figure 3
hx of the EE-IW model.Figure 4
Rx of the EE-IW model.Figure1 shows various shapes of the pdf for various values of the parameters, such as unimodal right-skewed.Figure2 shows the cdf curves for various values of some selected parameters.Figure3 shows the h(x) curves of the EE-IW model with various values of the shape parameters, and as the shape parameter increases, the h(x) first increase and then decrease.Figure4 shows the R(x) curves for different values of the parameters for distribution, and as the shape parameter increases, the R(x) decreases.


## 2.1. The Submodels of the EE-IW Distribution

In this section, some special cases of the proposed model are given. Table1 introduces a brief list of the submodels.Table 1
The subdistribution from the EE-IW.
cαβModelCDFReferences√11Exponentiated inverted Weibull (E-IW) distributionFx=e−cx−αFlaih et al. [13]1√1Standard inverted Weibull exponentiated (SIWE) distributionFx=e−x−αFlaih et al. [13]√11Exponentiated standard inverted exponential (ESIE) distributionFx=e−cx−1Flaih et al. [13]1√√Exponentiated Frechet (EF) distributionFx=1−1−e−x−αβBadr [14]√1√Exponentiated exponential (EE) distributionFx=1−e−x−cxβGupta and Kundu [15]From Table1, it can be noticed that the EE-IW reduces to the exponentiated IW (E-IW) model when β = 1. For β = c = 1, it becomes the standard IW exponentiated (SIWE) model. For β = α = 1, it reduces to the exponentiated standard inverted exponential (ESIE) distribution. For α = −1, it becomes the EE model. For c = 1, we get the exponentiated Frechet (EF) distribution.Figures1–4 illustrate the plots of the pdf, cdf, hazard, and reliability functions, respectively.Figure 1
pdf of the EE-IW model.Figure 2
cdf of the EE-IW model.Figure 3
hx of the EE-IW model.Figure 4
Rx of the EE-IW model.Figure1 shows various shapes of the pdf for various values of the parameters, such as unimodal right-skewed.Figure2 shows the cdf curves for various values of some selected parameters.Figure3 shows the h(x) curves of the EE-IW model with various values of the shape parameters, and as the shape parameter increases, the h(x) first increase and then decrease.Figure4 shows the R(x) curves for different values of the parameters for distribution, and as the shape parameter increases, the R(x) decreases.


## 3. Basic Properties

This section investigated some important basic properties of the EE-IW model.


### 3.1. The Noncentral Moment

Therth moment about zero of the EE-IW model is provided by(10)μr′=EXr=ArΓ1−rα,rα<1,where(11)Ar=cβ∑i=0∞−1iβ−1ici+11−r/α,r=0,1,….Letr=1 in equation (10), we get the expected value or the first moment:(12)μ1′=μ=EX=A1Γ1−1α.Forr=2 in equation (10), we get the second moment:(13)μ2′=EX2=A2Γ1−2α.Forr=3 in equation (10), we get the third moment:(14)μ3′=EX3=A3Γ1−3α.Forr=4 in equation (10), we get the fourth moment:(15)μ4′=EX4=A4Γ1−4α.The variance of the EE-IW distribution is obtained by using both equations (12) and (13) as follows:(16)σ2=VarX=A2_Γ1−2α−A1Γ1−1α2,α>0.We can define the coefficient of variation of EE-IW distribution by using both equations (12) and (13):(17)CVar=A2Γ2−1/α−A1Γ1−1/α2A1Γ1−1/α.The skewness for EE-IW isγ3 which can be obtained by referring to the moments by using equations (12)–(14) as(18)γ3=A3Γ1−3/α−3A1A2Γ1−1/αΓ1−2/α+2A31Γ1−1/α3A2Γ1−2/α−A1Γ1−1/α23/2,α>0.The kurtosis for EE-IW isγ4 which can be obtained by referring to the moments by using equations (12)–(15) as follows:(19)γ4=A4Γ1−4/α−4A3A1Γ1−3/αΓ1−1/α+6A12A2Γ1−1/α2Γ1−2/α−3A14Γ1−1/α4A2Γ1−2/α−A1Γ1−1/α22,α>0.Figure5 shows the mean, variance, skewness, and kurtosis curves of the EE-IW model with c = 2 and for various values of α and β.Figure 5
3D plots of moments.


### 3.2. The Quantile Function

The quantile function of the EE-IW model is computed by using (7) as(20)xq=MD=−1cln1−1−q1/β−1/α.Forq=0.5 in (20), we calculate the median (MD) of the EE-IW model as(21)xq=MD=−1cln1−1−0.51/β−1/α.The mode (MO) of the EE-IW model is derived by taking the first derivative of equation (5) and solving it as (22)f′x=cαβx−α−1−e−cx−α1−e−cx−αβ−1;x>0,c>0,α>0.The MO for EE-IW is derived by putting equation (22) equal to 0 and solving it numerically.Table2 displays some outcomes for various mean values, MD, MO, standard deviation (SD), γ3, and γ4.Table 2
Some numerical values of mean, MO, MD, SD,γ3, and γ4.
cαβMeanMDMOSDγ3γ40.520.51.85011.12351.83852.133612.45513.0961120.53.05042.17182.06092.67727.05481.9568320.55.79143.94862.67814.56082.63730.8660210.54.65993.56712.29933.52712.09860.5618220.54.37183.05181.42243.08632.16221.9095230.53.16052.61571.31101.98792.63592.02182212.98931.36972.59384.01796.83612.2378221.51.39511.19641.31100.83223.75872.00422221.37231.12451.28940.49242.84040.8749Table2 shows the measures of central tendency, SD, γ4, and γ3 of parameters c,α, and β for selected values. The statistical properties of the newly derived model were obtained numerically using Mathematica 11.2. Hence, to obtain the mean, MD, MO, SD, γ4, and γ3, we noticed the following remarks.When the valuesα and β are constant for various values of c, the mean, MD, MO, and SD will be increased, but γ4 and γ3 are decreasing.When the valuesc and β are constant for various values of α, the mean, MD, MO, and SD will be decreased, but γ4 and γ3 are increasing.When the valuesc and α are constant for various values of β, the mean, MD, MO, and SD will be decreased, but γ4 and γ3 are decreasing.


## 3.1. The Noncentral Moment

Therth moment about zero of the EE-IW model is provided by(10)μr′=EXr=ArΓ1−rα,rα<1,where(11)Ar=cβ∑i=0∞−1iβ−1ici+11−r/α,r=0,1,….Letr=1 in equation (10), we get the expected value or the first moment:(12)μ1′=μ=EX=A1Γ1−1α.Forr=2 in equation (10), we get the second moment:(13)μ2′=EX2=A2Γ1−2α.Forr=3 in equation (10), we get the third moment:(14)μ3′=EX3=A3Γ1−3α.Forr=4 in equation (10), we get the fourth moment:(15)μ4′=EX4=A4Γ1−4α.The variance of the EE-IW distribution is obtained by using both equations (12) and (13) as follows:(16)σ2=VarX=A2_Γ1−2α−A1Γ1−1α2,α>0.We can define the coefficient of variation of EE-IW distribution by using both equations (12) and (13):(17)CVar=A2Γ2−1/α−A1Γ1−1/α2A1Γ1−1/α.The skewness for EE-IW isγ3 which can be obtained by referring to the moments by using equations (12)–(14) as(18)γ3=A3Γ1−3/α−3A1A2Γ1−1/αΓ1−2/α+2A31Γ1−1/α3A2Γ1−2/α−A1Γ1−1/α23/2,α>0.The kurtosis for EE-IW isγ4 which can be obtained by referring to the moments by using equations (12)–(15) as follows:(19)γ4=A4Γ1−4/α−4A3A1Γ1−3/αΓ1−1/α+6A12A2Γ1−1/α2Γ1−2/α−3A14Γ1−1/α4A2Γ1−2/α−A1Γ1−1/α22,α>0.Figure5 shows the mean, variance, skewness, and kurtosis curves of the EE-IW model with c = 2 and for various values of α and β.Figure 5
3D plots of moments.


## 3.2. The Quantile Function

The quantile function of the EE-IW model is computed by using (7) as(20)xq=MD=−1cln1−1−q1/β−1/α.Forq=0.5 in (20), we calculate the median (MD) of the EE-IW model as(21)xq=MD=−1cln1−1−0.51/β−1/α.The mode (MO) of the EE-IW model is derived by taking the first derivative of equation (5) and solving it as (22)f′x=cαβx−α−1−e−cx−α1−e−cx−αβ−1;x>0,c>0,α>0.The MO for EE-IW is derived by putting equation (22) equal to 0 and solving it numerically.Table2 displays some outcomes for various mean values, MD, MO, standard deviation (SD), γ3, and γ4.Table 2
Some numerical values of mean, MO, MD, SD,γ3, and γ4.
cαβMeanMDMOSDγ3γ40.520.51.85011.12351.83852.133612.45513.0961120.53.05042.17182.06092.67727.05481.9568320.55.79143.94862.67814.56082.63730.8660210.54.65993.56712.29933.52712.09860.5618220.54.37183.05181.42243.08632.16221.9095230.53.16052.61571.31101.98792.63592.02182212.98931.36972.59384.01796.83612.2378221.51.39511.19641.31100.83223.75872.00422221.37231.12451.28940.49242.84040.8749Table2 shows the measures of central tendency, SD, γ4, and γ3 of parameters c,α, and β for selected values. The statistical properties of the newly derived model were obtained numerically using Mathematica 11.2. Hence, to obtain the mean, MD, MO, SD, γ4, and γ3, we noticed the following remarks.When the valuesα and β are constant for various values of c, the mean, MD, MO, and SD will be increased, but γ4 and γ3 are decreasing.When the valuesc and β are constant for various values of α, the mean, MD, MO, and SD will be decreased, but γ4 and γ3 are increasing.When the valuesc and α are constant for various values of β, the mean, MD, MO, and SD will be decreased, but γ4 and γ3 are decreasing.


## 4. The Maximum Likelihood Estimators

In this section, the MLE of the unknown parameters is introduced.LetX1,X2,X3.,…,Xn be a random sample from the EE-IW model which has parameters c, α, and β. The likelihood function (LLF) is Lθ|x=∏i=1nfxi where f. is reported in (5) and θ¯=c,α,β. By calculating the logarithm of LLF, we have the following:(23)l=nlnc+nlnα+nlnβ−α+1∑i=1nlnxi−c∑i=1nxi−α+β−1∑i=1nln1−e−cxi−α.Differentiate (23) in regard to c,α, and β and correspondingly we have(24)lj=∂lnL∂θj=1L.∂L∂θj,j=1,2,3.From (23), we have(25)l1=∂l∂c=nc−∑i=1nxi−α+β−1∑i=1nxi−αxi−αe−cxi−α1−e−cxi−α,(26)l2=∂l∂α=nα−∑i=1nlnxi+clnxi∑i=1nxi−α−cβ−1lnxi∑i=1nxi−αe−cxi−α1−e−cxi−α,(27)l3=∂l∂β=nβ+ln1−e−cxi−α.By setting the previous two equations (24) and (25) equal to 0 and solving them simultaneously yield the MLEs (c^,α^) of parameters (c,α).The MLE of the parameterβ, β^MLE, can be computed by using (26) as(28)β^MLE=−n∑i=1nln1−e−c^xi−α^.We computed the asymptotic variance-covariance (VC) matrix byIijθ¯, which includes the VC of estimations while ignoring the expectation of the second partial derivative (SPD) Iijθ¯=E−∂2lnlnL/∂θi∂j.The SPD of the parameters for the EE-IW model is(29)∂2l∂c2=−1c2−β−1x−α2e−cx−α1−e−cx−α−β−1x−α2e−cx−α21−e−cx−α2,∂2l∂α2=−1α2−cx−αlnx2+cβ−1x−αlnx2e−cx−α1−e−cx−α−c2β−1x−α2lnx2e−cx−α1−e−cx−α−c2β−1x−α2lnx2e−cx−α21−e−cx−α2,∂2l∂β2=−1β2,∂2l∂β∂c=∂2l∂c∂β=x−αe−cx−α1−e−cx−α,∂2l∂β∂α=∂2l∂α∂β=−cx−αlnxe−cx−α1−e−cx−α,∂2l∂α∂c=x−αlnx−β−1x−αlnxe−cx−α1−e−cx−α−cβ−1x−α2lnxe−cx−α1−e−cx−α−cβ−1x−α2lnxe−cx−α21−e−cx−α2.


## 5. Simulation Outcomes

To demonstrate the theoretical outcomes of the estimated issue, simulation experiments were conducted using Mathematica 11.2 software. 1000 random samples of sizen = 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 were generated from the EE-IW model. The initial value is chosen as c=0.8,α=0.2,β=0.5. The accuracy of the produced parameter estimators has been evaluated in terms of their estimate for the parameters, bias (B) and mean square error (MSEr), where(30)B=∑i=01000θ^1000,MSEr=∑i=01000θ^−θ21000.The B and MSEr of the estimators for the parameters for each sample size are computed.Table3 shows the values of B and the MSEr for the non-Bayesian estimators when parameters c^,α^, and β^ are unknown based on complete samples, using different sample sizes n.Table 3
The B and MSEr of the unknown parametersθ¯ = (c,α,β) with the initial values (0.8, 0.2, 0.5).
nMethodc^α^β^20MLE0.19790.59450.1942−0.60210.3998−0.32430.36250.15850.137840MLE0.14320.55480.1546−0.64430.3742−0.34530.32540.15230.129560MLE0.14250.51910.1246−066280.3437−0.36850.31980.14290.124780MLE0.13970.48760.1158−0.70640.3254−0.36980.30830.14050.1232100MLE0.13520.47560.1133−0.74890.3184−0.38560.30450.13930.1175Table4 shows the values of B and MSEr for the non-Bayesian estimators for the parameter c^ when α and β are known based on complete samples, using different sample sizes n.Table 4
c^, B, and MSEr of the unknown parameter c.
nMethodα=0.2,β=0.5α=0.4,β=0.7α=0.6,β=0.820MLE1.40921.16171.21910.60920.36170.41910.37120.13080.175640MLE0.99320.95430.94580.19320.15430.14580.03730.02380.021360MLE0.95090.91640.84710.15090.11640.04710.02280.01350.002280MLE0.92510.84610.83450.12510.04610.03450.01560.00210.0012100MLE0.81580.82030.81080.01580.02030.01080.00030.00040.0001Table5 shows the values of B and MSEr for the non-Bayesian estimators for the parameter α^when c and β are known based on complete samples, using different sample sizes n.Table 5
α^, B, and MSEr of the α unknown parameters θ¯ = (c,α,β).
nMethodc=0.2,β=0.2c=0.4,β=0.5c=0.8,β=0.720MLE0.25090.2518021560.05090.05180.02750.00260.00270.006940MLE0.21490.23510.21450.03660.03510.02640.00130.00120.006660MLE0.20890.22570.21130.02560.02570.01520.00070.00070.006080MLE0.18860.20760.21060.01590.00760.01430.00020.00050.0054100MLE0.18810.19380.2098−0.0119−0.00620.01350.00010.00040.0042Table6 shows the values of B and MSEr for the non-Bayesian estimators for the parameter β^ when c and α are known based on complete samples, using different sample sizes n.Table 6
The B and MSEr of theβ unknown parameter θ¯ = (c,α,β).
nMethodc=0.2,α=0.2c=0.4,α=0.5c=0.8,α=0.720MLE0.63210.64240.77390.13210.14240.27390.017440.02030.075040MLE0.57960.61140.60040.07960.11140.10040.00630.01240.010160MLE0.56450.54970.59670.06450.04970.09670.00420.00250.009480MLE0.56370.51460.54790.06370.01460.04790.00410.00020.0023100MLE0.52890.51180.52800.02890.01180.02800.00080.00010.0008From Table3 The values of B and the MSEr for the non-Bayesian estimators for the parameters c^ are evaluated when α and β is known based on complete samples, using different sample size n. we note that(1)
The biases of the estimates decrease as then increases(2)
The MSErs of the estimates decrease as the sample size increasesFrom Tables4–6, we note that(1)
The Bs and the MSErs of the estimates decrease as then increases(2)
As the sample size increases, the MSErs approaches zero


## 6. Modelling to Real Data

In this section, we choose different distributions of the same family and approximately from the EE-IW distribution such as exponentiated Weibull (EW) [16], EE Bur XII [17], EE [15], and exponentiated Frechet (EF) [14], and it is considered an application to three datasets. In order to choose the best model, we calculate some information criterion (IC), Akaike IC (AIC), corrected AIC (CAIC), and Bayesian IC (BIC) for all competing and subdistribution. We compute the MLEs for the EW, EE Bur XII, EE, and EF models.


### 6.1. First Dataset

The following dataset is presented by Almetwally [18]. The data came from a 32-day COVID-19 dataset from Saudi Arabia. The data are as follows: 0.0557, 0.0559, 0.0617, 0.0649, 0.0683, 0.0709, 0.0711, 0.0736, 0.0737, 0.0739, 0.0741, 0.0743, 0.0776, 0.0782, 0.0804, 0.0808, 0.0815, 0.0818, 0.0819, 0.0840, 0.0850, 0.0864, 0.0867, 0.0869, 0.0901, 0.0904, 0.0907, 0.0914, 0.0943, 0.0946, 0.1009, 0.1134.Table7 clearly shows that the EE-IW distribution fits better than the EE Bur XII, EF, EE, and EW models for this dataset. Also, Figure 6 illustrates the fitted empirical pdf for the dataset. Figure 6 shows that the EE-IW distribution is the best-fitting model among all the models tested, and they back up the results.Table 7
Parameter estimates and values of AIC, BIC, and CAIC, for the1st data.
Distributionc^α^β^m^AICBICCAICEE-IW0.04021.57315.4312—676.93676.32672.78EW3.54760.48592.3996—935.08939.48935.94EE-Bur XII8.26171.521927.220924.6929685.49691.35686.97EE2.2281—85.9425—895.72900.93895.84EF—1.38954.5093—717.42720.35717.83Figure 6
The empirical distribution and estimated cdf of the models for the COVID-19 data.


### 6.2. Second Dataset

The following dataset is presented by Nichols [19]. The data resulted from breaking stress of carbon fibers (in Gba). The data are as follows: 3.7, 3.11, 4.42, 3.28, 3.75, 2.96, 3.39, 3.31, 3.15, 2.81, 1.41, 2.76, 3.19, 1.59, 2.17, 3.51, 1.84, 1.61, 1.57, 1.89, 2.74, 3.27, 2.41, 3.09, 2.43, 2.53, 2.81, 3.31, 2.35, 2.77, 2.68, 4.91, 1.57, 2.00, 1.17, 2.17, 0.39, 2.79, 1.08, 2.88, 2.73, 2.87, 3.19, 1.87, 2.95, 2.67, 4.20, 2.85, 2.55, 2.17, 2.97, 3.68, 0.81, 1.22, 5.08, 1.69, 3.68, 4.70, 2.03, 2.82, 2.50, 1.47, 3.22, 3.15, 2.97, 2.93, 3.33, 2.56, 2.59, 2.83, 1.36, 1.84, 5.56, 1.12, 2.48, 1.25, 2.48, 2.03, 1.61, 2.05, 3.60, 3.11, 1.69, 4.90, 3.39, 3.22, 2.55, 3.56, 2.38, 1.92, 0.98, 1.59, 1.73, 1.71, 1.18, 4.38, 0.85, 1.80, 2.12, 3.65.Table8 clearly shows that the EE-IW distribution fits better than the EE Bur XII, EF, EE, and EW models for this dataset. Also, Figure 7 illustrates the fitted empirical pdf for the dataset. Figure 6 shows that the EE-IW distribution is the best-fitting model among all the models tested, and they back up the results.Table 8
Parameter estimates and values of AIC, BIC, and CAIC, for the2nd data.
Distributionc^α^β^m^AICBICCAICEE-IW0.02096.14610.0613—499.64507.45499.89EW1.49630.824314.1075—1053.741061.551053.99EE-Bur XII5.81252.06650.09765.8371505.89516.309506.309EE2.2281—85.9425—895.72900.93895.84EF—0.29665.7863—874.72879.93874.84Figure 7
The empirical distribution and estimated cdf of breaking stress of carbon fibers (in Gba).


### 6.3. Third Dataset

The following dataset is presented by Lawless [20]. The data resulted from a test on the endurance of deep groove ball bearings. The data are as follows: 17.88, 28, 92, 33, 41.52, 42.12, 45.60, 48.4, 51.84, 51.96, 54.12, 55.56, 67.8, 68.64, 68.88, 84.12, 93.12, 98.64, 105.12, 105.84, 127.92, 128.04, 173.4.Table9 clearly shows that the EE-IW distribution fits better than the EE Bur XII, EF, EE, and EW models for this dataset. Also, Figure 8 illustrates the fitted empirical pdf for the dataset. Figure 6 shows that the EE-IW distribution is the best-fitting model among all the models tested, and they back up the results.Table 9
Parameter estimates and values of AIC, BIC, and CAIC, for the3rd data.
Distributionc^α^β^m^AICBICCAICEE-IW2.302963.95060.0028—259.979264.521262.201EW0.02791.02104.8075—1081.601085.011082.86EE-Bur XII26.88960.90340.857131.0249483.52488.07485.75EE0.09303—111.869—900.735903.01901.34EF—2.88800.08317—307.03309.30307.63Figure 8
The empirical distribution and estimated cdf of the models for the deep groove ball bearings data.For Table7, the EE-IW distribution has the lowest AIC, BIC, and CAIC values among all fitted models. Hence, this new distribution can be chosen as the best model for fitting these data sets. Modeling to COVID-19 data demonstrates the model’s flexibility, usefulness, and capability.For Tables8 and 9, the EE-IW distribution has the lowest AIC, BIC, and CAIC values among all fitted models. Hence, this new distribution can be chosen as the best model for fitting these data. From Table 8, modeling breaking stress of carbon fibers data demonstrates the model’s flexibility, usefulness, and capability. In Table 9, modeling the data resulted from a test on the endurance of deep groove ball bearings.


## 6.1. First Dataset

The following dataset is presented by Almetwally [18]. The data came from a 32-day COVID-19 dataset from Saudi Arabia. The data are as follows: 0.0557, 0.0559, 0.0617, 0.0649, 0.0683, 0.0709, 0.0711, 0.0736, 0.0737, 0.0739, 0.0741, 0.0743, 0.0776, 0.0782, 0.0804, 0.0808, 0.0815, 0.0818, 0.0819, 0.0840, 0.0850, 0.0864, 0.0867, 0.0869, 0.0901, 0.0904, 0.0907, 0.0914, 0.0943, 0.0946, 0.1009, 0.1134.Table7 clearly shows that the EE-IW distribution fits better than the EE Bur XII, EF, EE, and EW models for this dataset. Also, Figure 6 illustrates the fitted empirical pdf for the dataset. Figure 6 shows that the EE-IW distribution is the best-fitting model among all the models tested, and they back up the results.Table 7
Parameter estimates and values of AIC, BIC, and CAIC, for the1st data.
Distributionc^α^β^m^AICBICCAICEE-IW0.04021.57315.4312—676.93676.32672.78EW3.54760.48592.3996—935.08939.48935.94EE-Bur XII8.26171.521927.220924.6929685.49691.35686.97EE2.2281—85.9425—895.72900.93895.84EF—1.38954.5093—717.42720.35717.83Figure 6
The empirical distribution and estimated cdf of the models for the COVID-19 data.


## 6.2. Second Dataset

The following dataset is presented by Nichols [19]. The data resulted from breaking stress of carbon fibers (in Gba). The data are as follows: 3.7, 3.11, 4.42, 3.28, 3.75, 2.96, 3.39, 3.31, 3.15, 2.81, 1.41, 2.76, 3.19, 1.59, 2.17, 3.51, 1.84, 1.61, 1.57, 1.89, 2.74, 3.27, 2.41, 3.09, 2.43, 2.53, 2.81, 3.31, 2.35, 2.77, 2.68, 4.91, 1.57, 2.00, 1.17, 2.17, 0.39, 2.79, 1.08, 2.88, 2.73, 2.87, 3.19, 1.87, 2.95, 2.67, 4.20, 2.85, 2.55, 2.17, 2.97, 3.68, 0.81, 1.22, 5.08, 1.69, 3.68, 4.70, 2.03, 2.82, 2.50, 1.47, 3.22, 3.15, 2.97, 2.93, 3.33, 2.56, 2.59, 2.83, 1.36, 1.84, 5.56, 1.12, 2.48, 1.25, 2.48, 2.03, 1.61, 2.05, 3.60, 3.11, 1.69, 4.90, 3.39, 3.22, 2.55, 3.56, 2.38, 1.92, 0.98, 1.59, 1.73, 1.71, 1.18, 4.38, 0.85, 1.80, 2.12, 3.65.Table8 clearly shows that the EE-IW distribution fits better than the EE Bur XII, EF, EE, and EW models for this dataset. Also, Figure 7 illustrates the fitted empirical pdf for the dataset. Figure 6 shows that the EE-IW distribution is the best-fitting model among all the models tested, and they back up the results.Table 8
Parameter estimates and values of AIC, BIC, and CAIC, for the2nd data.
Distributionc^α^β^m^AICBICCAICEE-IW0.02096.14610.0613—499.64507.45499.89EW1.49630.824314.1075—1053.741061.551053.99EE-Bur XII5.81252.06650.09765.8371505.89516.309506.309EE2.2281—85.9425—895.72900.93895.84EF—0.29665.7863—874.72879.93874.84Figure 7
The empirical distribution and estimated cdf of breaking stress of carbon fibers (in Gba).


## 6.3. Third Dataset

The following dataset is presented by Lawless [20]. The data resulted from a test on the endurance of deep groove ball bearings. The data are as follows: 17.88, 28, 92, 33, 41.52, 42.12, 45.60, 48.4, 51.84, 51.96, 54.12, 55.56, 67.8, 68.64, 68.88, 84.12, 93.12, 98.64, 105.12, 105.84, 127.92, 128.04, 173.4.Table9 clearly shows that the EE-IW distribution fits better than the EE Bur XII, EF, EE, and EW models for this dataset. Also, Figure 8 illustrates the fitted empirical pdf for the dataset. Figure 6 shows that the EE-IW distribution is the best-fitting model among all the models tested, and they back up the results.Table 9
Parameter estimates and values of AIC, BIC, and CAIC, for the3rd data.
Distributionc^α^β^m^AICBICCAICEE-IW2.302963.95060.0028—259.979264.521262.201EW0.02791.02104.8075—1081.601085.011082.86EE-Bur XII26.88960.90340.857131.0249483.52488.07485.75EE0.09303—111.869—900.735903.01901.34EF—2.88800.08317—307.03309.30307.63Figure 8
The empirical distribution and estimated cdf of the models for the deep groove ball bearings data.For Table7, the EE-IW distribution has the lowest AIC, BIC, and CAIC values among all fitted models. Hence, this new distribution can be chosen as the best model for fitting these data sets. Modeling to COVID-19 data demonstrates the model’s flexibility, usefulness, and capability.For Tables8 and 9, the EE-IW distribution has the lowest AIC, BIC, and CAIC values among all fitted models. Hence, this new distribution can be chosen as the best model for fitting these data. From Table 8, modeling breaking stress of carbon fibers data demonstrates the model’s flexibility, usefulness, and capability. In Table 9, modeling the data resulted from a test on the endurance of deep groove ball bearings.


## 7. Conclusion

In this study, the three-parameter exponentiated exponential inverted Weibull distribution (EE-IW) is proposed. Statistical properties of the EE-IW are studied. Maximum likelihood estimators of the EE-IW parameters are obtained. The information matrix and the asymptotic confidence bounds of the parameters are derived. Monte Carlo simulation studies are conducted under different sample sizes to study the theoretical performance of the MLE of the parameters.



---

*Source: 8521026-2022-03-22.xml*