Revised ISM IAS Merit Calculation Proposal June 22, 2010 Pat Fetterman Steve Kennedy (discussed with Shawn Whitacre & Philpe Saad 6/21/10)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Recommending a Strategy Ideas for Today and Tomorrow.
Advertisements

Statistical Evaluation of Dissolution for Specification Setting and Stability Studies Fasheng Li Associate Director, Pharmaceutical Statistics Worldwide.
January 9, 2013 BAL-001-TRE-1 Primary Frequency Response Update for Texas RE RSC.
IIIG LTMS V2 Review. LTMS V2 Review Data Summary: – Includes 285 Chartable reference oil results from all test laboratories – Most recent chartable reference.
Student Learning Targets (SLT)
Achievement Analyses – Matched Cohort Groups Oklahoma A+ Schools® vs. Randomly Matched OKCPS Students  OKLAHOMA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS  PLANNING, RESEARCH,
The Saga Continues: Measure Interactions for Residential HVAC and Wx measures Regional Technical Forum April 23, 2014.
ICAO USOAP CMA Seminar Exercise 1: LEG/02 – Article 83 bis Group 5 Verónica Decarlos Carlos F. Silva Rueda Ankar Doobay Tomás Abrego Clifford Themen.
NSF Merit Review Criteria Revision Background. Established Spring 2010 Rationale: – More than 13 years since the last in-depth review and revision of.
‘Enhancing the First Year Experience – A Case Study From Biomedical Sciences’ Paul Hagan Stephen M c Clean University of Ulster.
© Steven Alter, 2010, all rights reserved Validating Work System Principles for Use in Systems Analysis and Design Steven Alter Ryan Wright
Opportunity Engineering Harry Larsen The Boeing Company SCEA 2000 Conference.
Concept Analysis Document Executive Summary Template, (To view template instructions – Save this template to project files, reopen and then select View,
1 Quality Control Review of E3 Calculator Inputs Comparison to DEER Database Brian Horii Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. November 16, 2006.
Determination of System Equivalency – Starting note for WLTP IWG Meeting #8 in Pune, India Audi, EA-52, V2.0 WLTP-08-09e.
1/2555 สมศักดิ์ ศิวดำรงพงศ์
AICT5 – eProject Project Planning for ICT. Process Centre receives Scenario Group Work Scenario on website in October Assessment Window Individual Work.
A) The sample size. B) The level of significance.
Community Development & Planning Grant Pre-Application Meeting April 17,
Recommendation for Board approval of updated nodal fee filing Steve Byone Overview –Historical summary –Highlights from approved interim Nodal Surcharge.
© 2009 Chevron Oronite Companies. All rights reserved. Cummins ISM Reference Data Review for Cummins Surveillance Panel August 26, 2009 Jim Rutherford.
Analysis of the ISM Matrix Draft 3 November 5, 2004.
IIT BOMBAYIDP in Educational Technology * Paper Planning Template Resource – Paper-Planning-Template(SPT)Version 1.0, Dec 2013 Download from:
Information for school leaders and teachers regarding the process of creating Student Learning Targets. Student Learning targets.
Cat 5 -- Creative Arts Training, 6 March IS Projects Competition Prelims Monday, 6 April 2015.
Reject Appeal SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG Approve EVALUATION – FALL CONTINUE IMPLEMENTATION & SCHEDULING PLAN REVISION DIVISION MANAGEMENT.
Successful Concepts Study Rationale Literature Review Study Design Rationale for Intervention Eligibility Criteria Endpoint Measurement Tools.
Project Report. Suggested TOC Executive Summary Project Background and Assumptions Vision and Mission Statements Objectives SWOT Analysis Recommended.
1 Psych 5500/6500 The t Test for a Single Group Mean (Part 1): Two-tail Tests & Confidence Intervals Fall, 2008.
Elk Grove Water District – Finance Meeting Water Rate Update and Connection Fees Habib Isaac – Principal Gregg Tobler – Task Manager January 30, 2013.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
HMTF Update TAS Nov 3-4, 2015 Kevin Harris, ColumbiaGrid TEPPC\Hydro Modeling Work Group - Chair.
Public Health Lessons from HACCP-Based Inspection Models Project Presentation by Loren D. Lange August 7, 2007 United States Department of Agriculture.
RPRS TF and QSE Managers Report to PRS 1)Procurement (QSE Managers) 2)Cost Allocation (RPRS Task Force) –PRR 674 –PRR 676 –PRR 678.
JACTest Monitoring Center Test Monitoring Center Report to the Mack Test Surveillance Panel June 17, 2002 Montreal.
ISM Test Development Task Force Report June 21, 2004.
Enhancements to IIIG LTMS By: Todd Dvorak
Anchor points in ASEP the shifting in the various proposals as the chairman has understood it ASEP meeting June 2008 v4.
Analysis of Alternate Approach Data (Round 9) 01 September 2004 jar.
Self Reflection and Professional Growth Synergy of Two Measures of Effectiveness.
Control Charts and Trend Analysis for ISO 17025
W.D.M. Limited North View, Staple Hill, Bristol BS16 4NX Telephone: Web: Andy Stevenson Anuradha Premathelaka John Donbavand.
Ductless Heat Pumps (DHP) in Single Family Homes with Zonal Electric Heat UES Measure Update Regional Technical Forum June 17, 2014.
Proposed C13 MERIT SYSTEM Steve Jetter/Abdul Cassim
Test Monitoring Center Report to the Mack Test Surveillance Panel
Formulae For each severity adjustment entity,
ICAO USOAP CMA Seminar Exercise 1: LEG/02 – Article 83 bis
Cummins ISM Reference Data Review Merit Addendum for Cummins Surveillance Panel August 26, 2009 Jim Rutherford.
Recommending a Strategy
Recommending a Strategy
HCS 542 Competitive Success/snaptutorial.com
HCS 542 Education for Service/snaptutorial.com
Blue Ridge School District 18
Recommending a Strategy
Summary of Health System Performance Across Dimensions, Revised Baseline Ranking Note: States highlighted in green expanded their Medicaid programs under.
Chapter Nine Part 1 (Sections 9.1 & 9.2) Hypothesis Testing
Update on the Online Conversion Process for CC.net and GOLD:
Summary of Health System Performance Across Dimensions, 2017 Scorecard Ranking Note: States highlighted in green expanded their Medicaid programs under.
D 4 Food webs Process: two open workshops WGGES consultation
2010 Market Share Guide.
Project collaborators’ names
Recommending a Strategy
Recommending a Strategy
AICT5 – eProject Project Planning for ICT
completely quite not at all lots some none at all
Unemployment Insurance Integrity Performance Measures
completely quite not at all lots some none at all
[Project name] [Presenter name]
Presentation transcript:

Revised ISM IAS Merit Calculation Proposal June 22, 2010 Pat Fetterman Steve Kennedy (discussed with Shawn Whitacre & Philpe Saad 6/21/10)

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 1 Summary mRevised calculation for Cummins ISM IAS merits proposed by the SP on May 26 impacts only oils with IAS results below 27 mg since Anchor and Hard Limit points are unchanged: mBased on Cummins’ original limit setting criteria, it is believed that adjusting the Anchor and potentially the Hard Limit points is justified mInitial limit setting targeted to generate significantly more than 350 merits mRevised merit calculation being proposed to SP before moving onto HDEOCP

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 2 Background Green highlighted areas: 1. Average of the 10 tests on when CJ-4 limits were established 2. Strategy to set the Anchor above the average of 830-2

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 3 Background m Green highlighted areas show 3 tests that were corrected after the change to screened injector screw hardware

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 4 Details m Highlighted areas show 3 tests that were corrected after the change to screened injector screw hardware Data available for setting CJ-4 Limits Included in original analysis Proposed for alternate

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 5 Data Summary / Proposal mBased on updated analysis, revised recommendation: qFull Merit = 22 mg (similar to SP May recommendation) qAnchor = 31 mg (~2 mg above avg. of all data) qHard Fail =43 mg (Anchor +2 stdev; similar to original approach)

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 6 Proposal Rationale mCJ-4 ISM limits set when (7 original + 3 post-corrected for IAS) data points were available; using the 3 corrected points more appropriate mAnchor qIAS (and CWL) anchor points were set to be above the average of these 10 tests with no CF (HDEOCP minutes Dec-2005 & Jan-2006) IAS Anchor = 27 mg relative to 24.5 mg average (+2.5 mg) qAverage of the IAS for these 10 tests increases significantly when the CF is applied to the last 3 tests 24.5 mg increases to 30.3 mg qUpdated IAS data supports increasing Anchor point to 30 – 33 mg based on original limit setting strategy qApproach is validated by full data set: Original 10 tests (including CF)30.3 mg All chartable data29.1 mg mFull Merit qAdjust to an “achievable” level with 19.1 mg CF mHard Limit qSet closer to Anchor to reflect improved statistics, lower standard deviation ~6 mg versus 11 mg

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 7 Proposal Summary mProposal increases avg IAS merits to match original intent with non-corrected data: q10 data points (no CF) = 432 q40 data points (w/ CF) = 435 mMeets Cummins’ original intent for to generate >350 ISM merits qCurrent system fails to do this qSP proposal does this by drastically increasing the slope between the Anchor & Full Merit points mRequest Cummins SP revisit IAS merits; evaluate this approach as potential recommendation to the HDEOCP

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 8 Back-Up

Cummins ISM IAS Merits (22-June 2010) 9