Technometrics

ISSN: 0040-1706 (Print) 1537-2723 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utch20

A Review and Analysis of the

MahalanobisTaguchi System
William H Woodall, Rachelle Koudelik, Kwok-Leung Tsui, Seoung Bum Kim,
Zachary G Stoumbos & Christos P Carvounis MD
To cite this article: William H Woodall, Rachelle Koudelik, Kwok-Leung Tsui, Seoung Bum
Kim, Zachary G Stoumbos & Christos P Carvounis MD (2003) A Review and Analysis of the
MahalanobisTaguchi System, Technometrics, 45:1, 1-15, DOI: 10.1198/004017002188618626
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/004017002188618626

Published online: 01 Jan 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 261

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=utch20
Download by: [University of Central Florida]

Date: 25 February 2016, At: 20:20

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

A Review and Analysis

of the MahalanobisTaguchi System
William H. Woodall and Rachelle Koudelik

Kwok-Leung Tsui and Seoung Bum Kim

Department of Statistics
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University
Blacksburg, VA 24061
( bwoodall@vt.edu; pkoudeli@vt.edu)

School of Industrial and Systems Engineering

Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA 30332
( ktsui@isye.gatech.edu; sbkim@isye.gatech.edu)

Zachary G. Stoumbos

Christos P. Carvounis, MD

Department of Management Science

and Information Systems and Rutgers Center
for Operations Research (RUTCOR)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Piscataway, NJ 08854
( stoumbos@andromeda.rutgers.edu)

State University of New York at Stony Brook

Nassau University Medical Center
East Meadow, NY 11554
( christos@numc.edu)

The MahalanobisTaguchi system (MTS) is a relatively new collection of methods proposed for diagnosis and forecasting using multivariate data. The primary proponent of the MTS is Genichi Taguchi, who
is very well known for his controversial ideas and methods for using designed experiments. The MTS
results in a Mahalanobis distance scale used to measure the level of abnormality of abnormal items
compared to a group of normal items. First, it must be demonstrated that a Mahalanobis distance
measure based on all available variables on the items is able to separate the abnormal items from the
normal items. If this is the case, then orthogonal arrays and signal-to-noise ratios are used to select
an optimal combination of variables for calculating the Mahalanobis distances. Optimality is de ned
in terms of the ability of the Mahalanobis distance scale to match a prespeci ed or estimated scale
that measures the severity of the abnormalities. In this expository article, we review the methods of
the MTS and use a case study based on medical data to illustrate them. We identify some conceptual,
operational, and technical issues with the MTS that lead us to advise against its use.
KEY WORDS: Classi cation analysis; Discriminant analysis; Medical diagnosis; Multivariate analysis; Pattern recognition; Signal-to-noise ratio; Taguchi methods.

1.

INTRODUCTION

group of items and a number of abnormal items that may

sometimes be classi ed into groups based on the severity
levels of the abnormalities. In the MTS, it must rst be
con rmed that the relative sizes of the Mahalanobis distances
(MDs) based on the standardized variables of the healthy
group can discriminate between normal and abnormal items.
Once this fact is established, the number of variables used
is reduced, if possible, using orthogonal arrays (OAs) and
signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios to evaluate the contribution of
each variable. Each row of the OA determines a subset of
the original variables. The recommended S/N ratio measures
the ability of the MDs, corresponding to the abnormal items
and calculated using this subset of variables, to re ect a
prespeci ed or estimated measure of the severity of the
abnormalities. Only those variables with effects that show
an increase in the average S/N ratio are retained. The MD
scale using these variables has a number of stated purposes,
including diagnosis and forecasting.

Genichi Taguchi is most well known for his work on

the design of experiments. His ideas have generated a
considerable amount of discussion and controversy and his
methods are widely used (see, e.g., Taguchi and Wu 1980;
Box 1996; Montgomery 1992; Nair 1992; Tsui 1996; Wu and
Hamada 2000; Taguchi, Chowdhury, and Taguchi 2000). The
general consensus, among statisticians at least, seems to be
that although many of Taguchis overall ideas on experimental
design are very important and in uential, the techniques that
he proposed should be replaced with simpler, more effective
statistical methods.
It is not as well known that Taguchi also proposed on-line
quality control methods (Taguchi 1981; Taguchi, Elsayed, and
Hsiang 1989). Adams and Woodall (1989) and Nayebpour
and Woodall (1993), among others, have studied these on-line
methods. Taguchis off-line ideas have had a much greater
impact than his ideas on on-line quality control.
We study a new set of methods proposed by Taguchi,
Chowdhury, and Wu (2001) and Taguchi and Rajesh (2000)
collectively referred to as the MahalanobisTaguchi system
(MTS). The MTS is proposed as a diagnosis and forecasting
method using multivariate data. In this approach, this multivariate data must be available on a healthy or normal

2003 American Statistical Association and

the American Society for Quality
TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1
DOI 10.1198/004017002188618626
1

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

WILLIAM H. WOODALL ET AL.

Taguchi et al. (2001) listed a number of areas of application

for the MTS, including inspection and sensor systems in manufacturing, patient monitoring, re detection, earthquake forecasting, weather forecasting, credit scoring, and voice recognition. They also described case studies involving engineering
applications of the MTS in many large companies, including Nissan Motor, Mitsubishi Space Software, Xerox, Delphi
Automotive Systems, ITT Industries, Ford Motor, Fuji Photo
Film, and others.
We review the MTS by explaining the approach and calculations in Section 2. In Section 3 we discuss the MTS and identify some conceptual, operational, and technical issues associated with the methods. We present a detailed case study in
Section 4. We discuss other aspects of the MTS in Section 5,
and present concluding remarks in Section 6. A primary conclusion is that the methods of the MTS are, in some respects,
not well de ned conceptually or operationally.
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE
MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM
In this section we provide a detailed explanation of the MTS
and the required computations, as presented by Taguchi and
Rajesh (2000). These authors break the MTS into four stages.
In stage 1, the variables that de ne the healthiness of an
item are identi ed. Data are collected on the healthy or normal
group. As described later, the variables are standardized and
the MDs calculated for the normal items. These values de ne
the Mahalanobis space used as a frame of reference for the
MTS measurement scale.
We refer to the variables collected on each item to determine its healthiness as Vi , i D 11 21 : : : 1 p. We denote by
Vij the observation of the ith variable on the jth item, i D
11 21 : : : 1 p, j D 11 21 : : : 1 m. Thus the p 1 data vectors for
the normal group are denoted by vj , j D 11 21 : : : 1 m.
Each individual variable in each data vector is standardized
by subtracting the mean of the variable and dividing by its
standard deviation, with both statistics calculated using data
on the variable in the normal group. Thus we have the standardized values

S5 S 1
Zij D 4Vij V
i D 11 21 : : : 1 p1
j D 11 21 : : : 1 m1
i
i
(1)
where

SD
V
i
and
Si D

m
X
jD1

m
X

j D1

Vij m

S 52 4m 150
4Vij V
i

Next, the values of the MDs, MDj , j D 11 21 : : : 1 m, are calculated for the normal items using

MDj D 41 p5zTj S1 zj 1
(2)

where zTj D 6Z1j 1 Z2j 1 : : : 1 Zpj 7 and S is the sample correlation

matrix calculated as
m

X
S D 1 4m 15 zj zTj 0
jD1

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) stated that the MDj values in (2)
have an average value of unity. For this reason, they also refer
to the Mahalanobis space as the unit space.
In stage 2, abnormal items must be selected. There is no
uncertainty incorporated into the MTS regarding the status of
each item used for determining the MTS measurement scale.
As in discriminant analysis, it is assumed that each item is
known to be either normal or abnormal.
The MDs of the abnormals with data vectors denoted by vj ,
j D m C 11 m C 21 : : : 1 m C t are calculated after the variables
are standardized using the normal-group means and standard
deviations. Thus we have MDj , j D m C 11 m C 21 : : : 1 m C t,
with MDj de ned in (2), where the ith element of zj in
(2), Zij , is calculated using (1), for i D 11 21 : : : 1 p and
j D m C 11 m C 21 : : : 1 m C t.
According to the MTS, the resulting MD scale is good if
the MDj values for the abnormal items are higher than those
for the normal items.
In stage 3, OAs and S/N ratios are used to identify the most
useful set of variables. An OA is a design matrix that contains
the levels of various factors in the runs of an experiment to
investigate the effects of the variables on a response of interest. Each factor of the experiment is assigned to a column of
the OA, and the rows of the matrix correspond to the experimental runs. The MTS has p factors in the experiment, each
with two levels. The level of a factor signi es the inclusion
or exclusion of a variable in the MTS analysis. The p factors
are assigned to the rst p columns of the OA, with the other
columns ignored. Thus the OA selected must initially have
at least p columns. Each row of the OA determines which
variables are included in any given experimental run. For each
of these runs, the MD values are calculated for the abnormals
as in stage 2, but using only the indicated variables. These
MD values are then used to calculate the value of a S/N ratio,
which becomes the response for the run.
Many different S/N ratios are used in Taguchis analysis
of designed experiments. These are de ned in such a way
that larger S/N ratio values are preferred. One option mentioned in the MTS is to use Taguchis larger-is-better S/N ratio,
de ned as
"

2 #
mCt
X
1
10 log 41=t5
1
jDmC1 MD j
because larger MD values further separate the abnormals from
the normal group. Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) recommended
using the dynamic type S/N ratio instead. For the dynamic
S/N ratio to be calculated, the severity value of each abnormal
item must be established. These severity levels are denoted by
Mj , j D m C 11 m C 21 : : : 1 m C t. Larger values of Mj indicate
a greater degree of abnormality. The goal of this stage is to
select a subset of the original variables such that the resulting MDj values of the abnormals most appropriately re ect
the levels of severity Mj . If the values of Mj are unknown,
Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) recommended grouping the abnormal items into classes based on a general level of severity,
perhaps obtained subjectively. The value of Mj used for each
member of a class is the average value of the square roots
of the MDs for the members in the class. These MDs are

THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM

calculated using all of the variables. These averages for the

classes are referred to as working averages.
Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) used the model

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

Yj D M j 1
j D m C 11 m C 21 : : : 1 m C t1
(3)
p
where Yj D MD j , j D m C 11 m C 21 : : : 1 m C t, to evaluate
the agreement between the two scales. Thus a regression line
through the origin is recommended.
As explained by Lunani, Nair, and Wasserman (1997) and
Tsui (1999), the justi cation of the dynamic S/N ratio can
be best understood by considering the analysis of variance
(ANOVA) table corresponding to the tting of a straight line
through the origin. Brownlee (1965, pp. 358361), for example, gave the ANOVA table with the expected mean squares
included. In the ANOVA calculations, the total sum of squares
is given by
SST D

mCt
X

Yj2 1

jDmC1

and the regression sum of squares can be written as

!2 ,
mCt
mCt
X
X
SSR D
M j Yj
Mj2 0
jDmC1

We also have

jDmC1

E4SSR5 D 2 C 2 r 1

where we assume that the variance of the usual error term for
the model in (3) is 2 , and
rD

mCt
X

Mj2 0

jDmC1

Thus if the Mj values are assumed to be xed, then an unbiased estimator of 2 is

O 2 D 41=r54SSR MSE51
(4)
where MSE D 4SST SSR5=4t 15.
With this background and notation, the dynamic S/N ratio
is de ned as
10 log641=r54SSR MSE5=MSE7 D 10 log6O 2 =MSE70 (5)

This S/N ratio tends to be large when the square roots of the
abnormal MDi values are proportional to the corresponding
Mi values with a large value of the slope. Taguchi et al. (2001,
p. 30) referred to O 2 =MSE as the reciprocal of the forecasting
error.
For a given variable Vi , the average value of the S/N ratio is
C
determined over all runs with the variable present, say S=N i ,
and with the variable absent, say S=Ni . The gain is the
C

difference in these two averages, that is, S=Ni S=Ni . If

the gain is positive, then the variable Vi is retained in the MTS
analysis; if not, then it is deleted. The gain of a variable is
equivalent to an estimated main effect of a factor in statistical
design of experiments terminology.
The overall gain, de ned as the average S/N ratio using
the variables resulting from stage 3 minus the average S/N
ratio obtained using all of the variables, is used to measure the
improvement obtained by the optimization process. This gain
is said to measure the improvement in the diagnosis process
as compared to the original system.

The nal stage, stage 4, involves future diagnosis and forecasting with the MTS scale based on the useful variables.
Depending on the value of MD, it is advocated that corrective
and other actions be taken. A quadratic loss function is used
to compute thresholds for the values of the MD, such that
losses due to the two types of classi cation errors are balanced
in some sense. The determination of the threshold under the
MTS is illustrated in Section 4.
3.

COMMENTS ON THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI

SYSTEM APPROACH

In this section we discuss some issues related to the MTS.

We consider the conceptual issues the most important, followed by the operational issues.
3.1

Conceptual Issues

The methods of the MTS are considered ad hoc in the sense

that they are not developed using any underlying statistical
theory. Taguchis off-line and on-line methods share this characteristic. Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) did not compare the
MTS to discriminant analysis or any other multivariate statistical method. They stated only that their system is much different from the classical multivariate methods. General comparisons of statistical performance under various assumed models
would be of limited impact under their assertion that the MTS
methods are data analytic rather than usual probability based
inference. Contrary to statistical approaches, for example,
under the MTS, the abnormal items do not constitute a separate population, because each abnormal item is said to be
unique. The group of normal items is said to be the only
population in MTS. Even this terminology does not match
statistical terminology in which the normal group would be
considered, in most cases, to be a sample.
There are no distributional assumptions whatsoever in the
MTS. It is not assumed, for example, that the data vectors
are multivariate normal. No probability distributions are used
to model the observations, the variability of statistics, or the
expected losses. Taguchi et al. (2001, p. 17) stated that the
core of statistics is distribution. In quality engineering, distribution is not considered.
Selection of the abnormal items is a crucial aspect of the
MTS. It is not clear whether a representative selection is made
from some population of abnormals, as would be the case in
statistical approaches, or whether the abnormals are selected
to be somewhat extreme cases. It appears that each important type of abnormality would have to be considered in a
separate MTS analysis. For example, in a medical diagnosis
application, Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) stated that the stages
of the MTS would have to be performed for each kind of
disease. This point is not clear in general, however, because
these authors also stated that different kinds of abnormal conditions with different degrees of severity have to be checked
in stage 2.
Because of the lack of clarity regarding the fundamental
issues of sampling in MTS, we nd its implementation to be
ill advised. Thus we agree with one of the reviewers, who
stated that no data analysis can be useful if the manner in
which the data (e.g., the abnormal cases) are assembled is
TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

WILLIAM H. WOODALL ET AL.

not understood in the context of a meaningful sampling (and

conceptual) framework.
In addition, in our view, the use of the MTS measurement
scale has never been clearly explained. Taguchi and Rajesh
(2000), for example, stated that the problem of the MTS is not
one of classi cation of a future observation into one of two
populations corresponding to normal and abnormal. Taguchi
et al. (2001, p. 7) stated that the MD values should be used
in continuous mode rather than discrete mode. Nevertheless,
a university admission process is given as an application of
the MTS that would seem to require classi cation. Also, the
use of a threshold for MD in the MTS seems to imply classi cation. It is clear, however, that the MTS results in an MD
measurement scale that should measure the degree of abnormality of the items. Use of the MD scale is similar to that of a
discriminant function in discriminant analysis. This similarity
is discussed further in the case study in Section 4. Another statistical option would be to use standard model- tting methods,
such as ordinal logistic regression, with the level of severity as
the dependent variable and the variables Vi , i D 11 21 31 : : : 1 p,
as the explanatory variables.
3.2

Operational Issues

In stage 2, it must be shown that the MD values of the

abnormal items are higher than those for the normal items. No
operational de nition is given, however, for higher than. If
the criterion means that the smallest MD value for the abnormal items must be higher than the largest value for the normal
items, as in the case study in Section 4, then this would appear
to limit the usefulness of the approach. If normal and abnormal items are not clearly distinguishable, then it seems that
misclassi cation probabilities must be considered, something
not possible under the MTS framework that eschews the use
of probability.
A designed fractional factorial experiment is used as a
search algorithm for optimization in the MTS. The run for
which all factors are at their low levels is not a valid run,
however, because at least one variable must be used in the
analysis. Thus an OA containing this run could not be used.
The OA and the experimental design methods are used as an
optimization technique to nd the combination of variables
that maximize the S/N ratio. As illustrated in the case study
in Section 4, this optimal combination is not always obtained.
Fractional factorial designs are used in industry to reduce the
number of runs, because each run is often expensive. This
goal seems much less important in an optimization application
involving only computations. Of course, the MTS approach
could be modi ed to include a better search algorithm for
the optimal combination of variables or another S/N ratio,
e.g., one based on a rank correlation coef cient that would
lead to an MTS scale that would match, to the greatest extent
possible, the order of the given severity levels of the abnormal
items.
3.3

Technical Issues

Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) stated that the expected value of

MDj in (2) for the normal items is unity. This is an approximation, however, evidently based on a chi-squared distribution
TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

with p degrees of freedom. This is the probability distribution

of pMDj , provided that sampling is from a multivariate normal distribution and the mean vector and variance-covariance
matrix are assumed to be known and used in the calculations
instead of the estimates. Under the assumption of multivariate
normality and estimation of the mean vector and variancecovariance matrix, Tracy, Young, and Mason (1992) reported
that the marginal distribution of MDj is related to a beta distribution and has a mean of (m 15=m, not unity. The mean
of MDj is also (m 15=m if the m observations in the normal
group represent the entire population of normal items. Finally,
it can be shown using matrix algebra that the average MD
value for the m items in the normal group is always exactly
(m 15=m.
Moreover, Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) stated that O from (4)
is 1 when working averages are used to t the regression line
through the origin. This is true, however, only if the working
averages are calculated using the variables included in the particular run being considered. It is not reasonable to use just
the variables in each run to calculate the working averages,
because this would cause the measure of the degree of severity
of abnormal items, and their relative rankings, to vary from
run to run. Although descriptions of the MTS do not specify
explicitly the variables used to obtain the working averages,
all of the variables are used to obtain the working averages in
the medical data case study of Taguchi and Rajesh (2000).
4.

A MEDICAL CASE STUDY

Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) and Taguchi et al. (2001) justi ed their MTS approach solely through the use of case studies.
In this section we consider a medical diagnosis case study
of Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) involving liver disease. The
study group comprised a healthy group of 200 people and
an unhealthy group of 17 people. This healthy group was
also used in a case study presented by Taguchi et al. (2001,
chap. 3).
The data variables consist of age (V1 ), gender (V2 ), and the
15 blood test measurements listed in Table 1. The data are
available in EXCEL format from the rst author.
4.1

Results of the MTS

As described by Taguchi and Rajesh (2000), the MD values were calculated in stage 1 for the healthy group, forming
the Mahalanobis space. The reported MD values ranged from
.3784 to 2.3581. The average MD value is given as .9951,
which is, apart from rounding error, equal to (m 15=m D
199=200 D 0995, as expected. In stage 2, the MD values calculated using the observations from the unhealthy group were
higher, ranging from 7.7274 to 135.6978, so the measurement
scale was said to be good. We note that such a wide, clear
separation between the groups of interest is often not possible
in many applications of traditional statistical methods.
Because there were 17 variables, Taguchi and Rajesh
(2000) selected an L32 (231 5 OA in stage 3. This fractional
factorial design can accommodate up to 31 factors with 32
runs. Taguchi and Rajesh assigned the 17 variables to the rst
17 columns of the array. The remaining columns are ignored.
The MD values were calculated for all 17 unhealthy patients,

THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM

Table 1.

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

Variables

The Case Study Blood Test Variables With Normal Ranges

Symbol

Acronym

Normal ranges

Taguchi et al. (2001) normal ranges

Total protein in blood

Albumin in blood
Cholinesterase
(pseudocholinesterase)
Glutamate O transaminase
(asparate aminotransferase)
Glutamate P transaminase
(alanine transaminase)
Lactic dehydrogenase
Alkaline phosphatase

V3
V4
V5

TP
Alb
ChE

6.57.5 g/dL
3.54.5 g/dL
.601.00 dpH

V6

GOT

6.08.3 g/dL
3.45.4 g/dL
Depends on technique;
818 U/mL
1034 IU/L

V7

GPT

659 U/L

022 U

V8
V9

LDH
Alp

130250 U
2.010.0 U

r-glutamyl transpeptidase
(gamma-glutamate transferase)
Leucine aminopeptidase

V10

r-GPT

105333 IU/L
0250 U/L, normal; 250750 U/L,
moderate elevation
051 IU/L

V11

LAP

Total cholesterol

V12

TCh

Triglyceride
Phospholipid
Creatinine
Blood urea nitrogen
Uric acid

V13
V14
V15
V16
V17

TG
PL
Cr
BUN
UA

225 U

068 U

Serum: Male: 80200 U/mL

Female: 75185 U/mL
<200 desirable, 200239
borderline high, 240C high
10190 mg/dL
Platelet: 150,000400,000/mm3
.81.4 mg/dL
720 mg/dL
4.18.8 mg/dL

for all of the 32 variable combinations indicated by the rows

of the OA. Taguchi et al. (2001, p. 42) listed the runs of
this OA. To obtain the dynamic S/N ratio, working averages
were used as the values of Mj , j D 11 21 : : : 1 17. The rst 10
unhealthy patients were placed in a class corresponding to a
mild level of severity of disease, and the remaining 7 were
placed into a class of medium severity. The working averages
were M1 D 303885 and M2 D 609180, calculated using all of
the variables.
Using the gain in the average value of the S/N ratio calculated for each variable, variables V4 , V5 , V10 , V12 , V13 , V14 , V15 ,
and V17 had positive gains and were retained in the analysis
and considered useful for future diagnosis. In a con rmation
run using only these variables, it was shown that average S/N
ratio (402696 dB) was higher than the average S/N ratio
when all variables were used (602520 dB). Thus it was concluded that the dynamic S/N ratio analysis gave improved
results.
Our MTS calculations showed that the MD scale did not
match the working-averages scale, in that the MD values for
some of the patients with mild disease were higher than those
for some of the patients with medium severity of the disease.
Table 2 and Figure 1 show the MD values corresponding to
the unhealthy group for the combination of variables resulting
from using the MTS, the optimal combination in maximizing
the S/N ratio from the 32 runs in the OA, and the true optimal combination of variables obtained through our evaluation
of all (217 1) possible combinations. The overlooked combination from the OA included variables V1 , V4 , V5 , V10 , V11 , V14 ,
V15 , V16 , and V17 , with an average S/N ratio for the unhealthy
group of 303372. Note from Figure 1, however, that this
combination of variables results in a MD scale that does a
very poor job discriminating between the rst 10 subjects with
mild levels of disease and the 7 medium severity subjects. The
optimal combination obtained through our exhaustive search
included variables V3 , V5 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , and V17 , with
a considerably higher average S/N ratio of 107606. In fact,

there were 7,124 different combinations of variables with an

average S/N ratio larger than the combination obtained using
the MTS method. Thus the S/N ratio resulting from the MTS
method based on the OA is at the 94.56th percentile of the
set of average S/N ratios resulting from using all possible
combinations of the variables. In addition, we found numerous
combinations of the variables for which all of the MD values
for patients with mild disease severity were less than those for
the patients with a medium severity.
Taguchi et al. (2001, p. 44) gave a method for determining
the threshold in this application such that if the MD value
exceeds the threshold, a patient should have a more complete
medical examination. The threshold is given by
p
T D 4A=A0 5 D 1
(6)

where A is the cost of the complete examination (including

loss of time), A0 is the loss caused by not taking the complete examination and having the disease show up before the
Table 2. MD Values for the Unhealthy Group for Various
Combinations of Variables
Subject number Level of disease
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Mild
Mild
Mild
Mild
Mild
Mild
Mild
Mild
Mild
Mild
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium

MTS
130937
140726
170342
100804
180379
80605
130896
270910
280110
350741
200828
180578
340127
850564
740175
1040424
1230022

Optimal in OA Optimal
80058
70485
90500
40951
90367
60643
70794
80162
100278
200992
160517
140607
350229
130105
90560
290200
440742

130329
80616
80002
120311
120042
60139
60139
220666
260000
140422
200833
190312
440614
320720
280560
310810
570226

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

WILLIAM H. WOODALL ET AL.

Group
1

.
.. ::
: .
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------MTS

..
.
.
.
.
.
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------MTS

.
:.
.::
.
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------OA Optimal

....
. .
.
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------OA Optimal

.
:: :. ..
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------Optimal

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

Figure 1.

: . :
.
.
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-------Optimal
0
25
50
75
100
125
Dotplot of MD Values for MTS, OA Optimal, and Optimal Combinations By Group (1 D mild; 2 D moderate).

next examination or the loss increase after having subjective

symptoms followed by taking a complete examination, and
D is the mid-value of the MD of a patient group having
the subjective symptoms. It is pointed out that T will vary by
disease, because the costs will vary by disease. The terms used
in (6) are not clearly de ned, however, because the meaning of
subjective symptoms is not clear. It is important to note that
statistical approaches based on misclassi cation costs would
incorporate into any decision rule the probability of having the
disease, given the data on a subject (see, e.g., Zielezny and
Dunn 1975).
4.2

Results Using Standard Methods

Descriptions of the MTS do not mention graphical displays

of the raw data. Our rst step in the analysis of the medical
data, however, was to plot each variable by status (healthy D 1;
mild disease D 2; medium disease D 3). These plots are shown
in the Appendix.
A key aspect of medical diagnosis involves noting which
variables fall outside their corresponding normal ranges. Normal ranges are calculated to include 95% of the measurements
on all healthy patients. Taguchi et al. (2001, p. 3) discounted
the usefulness of these ranges based on the work of Kanetaka
(1990), stating that they are arbitrarily determined by test
chemical manufacturers or, in extreme cases, textbook values used without modi cation. From the discussion of Harris
(1981), however, it seems that considerable effort has gone
into the determination of normal ranges. The standard practice
of using normal ranges in medical diagnosis does have problems, however, as listed by Begg (1991), one of which is the
fact that normalcy is an inherently multivariate concept.
The normal ranges that we obtained from the National
Library of Medicine (2001) are given in Table 1. The normal
range for alkaline phosphatase (V9 ) was obtained from
Neuschwander-Tetri (1995). The ranges given by Taguchi
et al. (2001, p. 36) for several of the variables are also shown
in Table 1.
Note that the pair of normal ranges for cholinesterase (V5 )
in Table 1 do not match each other and are inconsistent
with the values of this variable given in the dataset. Thus
we do not consider the normal range for this variable. In
TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

addition, the normal range given by Taguchi et al. (2001) for

alkaline phosphatase (V9 ) does not match the values given in
the dataset. It can be noted that the normal ranges given by
Taguchi et al. (2001) do not exactly match those given by
the National Library of Medicine for the other variables. It is
not unusual for different sources to give somewhat different
normal ranges. Also, the original study was done in Japan,
so there could be differences in the normal ranges for the
Japanese and the U.S. populations. The normal range for a
variable also depends on the measurement method used. We
have no information on the measurement methods used in
this case study.
Table 3 lists each variable for each unhealthy patient
that is well outside the corresponding normal range for
each unhealthy patient. We use the normal ranges from the
National Library of Medicine, with the exception of alkaline
phosphatase (V9 ), because we have the ranges for all variables
and, for the most part, they cover more of the corresponding
values of the healthy group. Note that subjects 2 and 3 do
not have any variables clearly outside any of the normal
ranges, but they differ considerably from the healthy group

Table 3. Variables for Unhealthy Patients

Well Outside Normal Ranges
Subject number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Variable number
12, 13
None
None
13
10
7
7
13
12, 13
4, 12
10, 12
10
10
10, 13
6, 7, 13
3, 6, 7, 10, 12
6, 7, 8, 10, 13

THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM

The scatterplot of cholinesterase (V5 ) and r-GPT (V10 )

shows a clear separation between the healthy and unhealthy
patients. This plot is shown in Figure 2, with healthy subjects
represented by 1, those with mild disease by 2, and those
with medium disease by 3. All outlying points correspond
to unhealthy patients with two values plotted at the point
(318, 44).
Similarly, the unhealthy patients also show up in the scatterplot of PL (V14 ) versus TCh (V12 ). This is illustrated in
Figure 3. Taguchi et al. (2001, p. 37) give the correlation
matrix for the variables for the healthy group that shows the
variables V12 and V14 as the most highly correlated pair.
There are some signi cant differences in variation by gender over all groups. This is illustrated in Figure 4 by the r-GPT
(V10 ).
There has been an extensive amount of research on the use
of statistical modeling for medical diagnosis (see, e.g., Sahai
and Khurshid 1991). We applied the methods of discriminant
analysis to the medical data, as discussed by Albert and Harris
(1987, pp. 101115). Interestingly, these authors apply discriminant analysis to the diagnosis of liver disease to illustrate
their approach. We performed the discriminant analysis under
the assumption of multivariate normality for two groups, with
250

350

V14 PL

1. We note from Figure A.1 that the unhealthy patients are

on average 10 years older than the healthy patients. If the
medical variables vary naturally by age, then it would seem
important to have roughly the same range of ages in the two
groups.
2. From Figure A.14, there is a large difference between
the abnormals and the healthy group for phospholipid (V14 ),
but all values of this variable are within the normal range.
3. It is not clear from the univariate dotplots in Figures
A.15 and A.17 why creatine (V15 ) and uric acid (V17 ) should
be declared to be useful variables for the MTS.
4. Some variables dropped under the MTS could be useful in the diagnosis for particular patients. In particular, this
appears true for variables V6 and V7 for subjects numbered 15,
16, and 17 in the unhealthy group.

250

150
100

200

300

V12 TCh
Figure 3.
, 3).

Scatterplot of Variable 14 Versus Variable 12 (, 1; + , 2;

gender excluded in the analysis and a log transformation on

V10 . The resulting discriminant function did not do as well
as the MTS recommended scale, however, in separating the
patients with mild disease severity from those with medium
disease severity.
From the medical considerations discussed in more detail
later, however, it is not reasonable to simply use collectively
all of the variables in this dataset to assess the severity of liver
disease. As discussed by Bodily and Fitz (1996) and Chopra
(2001), the level of liver disease is most often measured by the
modi ed ChildPugh classi cation score, which is based on
two clinical and three biochemical measures. The two clinical
measures are ascites ( uid in the abdomen) and encephalopathy (mental alertness), and the three biochemical measures are
bilirubin, albumin, and prothrombin time (blood clotting factor). Only albumin [Alb (V4 )] is included in the dataset used
for this case study. Thus it is not possible to accurately assess
the level of liver disease for the patients listed as abnormal.
4.3

Medical Considerations

In this case study we have considered using the MTS

in assessing the presence and extent of liver disease in a
limited group of Japanese patients. Taguchi and Rajesh (2000)
attempted to derive a valid diagnostic scale based on these
data. We have no information on how the patients were
selected, or on the criteria used to identify the severity of their
disease. Despite reservations concerning the data, we have
presented some statistical results regarding the performance of
the MTS. In this section we discuss some important medical
issues concerning the dif culty of treating liver disease as
a single entity, the shortcomings resulting from the use of

200

V10 r-GPT

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

with respect to V5 . The relevance of the various variables to

the diagnosis of liver disease is discussed in Section 4.3.
The following conclusions can be reached by considering
the raw data, the dotplots, and the normal ranges:

150

V2 Gender
10

100
50
0
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

V5 ChE

100

200

V10 r-GPT

Figure 2. Scatterplot of Variable 10 Versus Variable 5 (, 1; + , 2;

, 3).

Figure 4. Dotplot of V-10, r-GPT, by Gender.

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

WILLIAM H. WOODALL ET AL.

so-called liver function tests (LFTs), and Taguchi and

Rajeshs (2000) lack of data from some critical, standard LFTs
used for the diagnosis of liver disease and the classi cation
of its severity level.
The diagnosis of liver disease is complicated for several
reasons. For one, it is attributed to a diverse number of liver
disorders with highly variable underlying pathophysiology and
clinical presentations. In addition, the only way to obtain speci c diagnostic results is often through invasive techniques
(e.g., radiologic procedures and liver biopsy) or immunologic
tests that allow speci c diagnoses (e.g., hepatitis serology).
The LFTs are also often used for diagnostic purposes. They
represent a collection of tests that seldom give a speci c diagnosis; rather, they suggest a general category of liver disorders
(Pratt and Kaplan 1999). It is essential that LFTs be used
collectively, because they have a limited sensitivity and speci city. According to Pratt and Kaplan (1999, p. 206) when
more than one of these tests provides abnormal ndings or the
ndings are persistently abnormal on serial determinations, the
probability of liver disease is high. When all test results are
normal, the probability of missing occult liver disease is low.
The LFTs are divided into three major categories: (1) tests
of the livers ability to transport organic anions and metabolize drugs, such as serum bilirubin; (2) tests that detect injury
to liver cell, including aminotrasferases, such as GOT (V6 ),
transaminases, such as GPT (V7 ), and alkaline phosphatase
Alp (V9 5; and (3) tests of livers biosynthetic capacity, including serum albumin Alb (V4 ), and blood clotting factors, such
as prothrombin time (Kaplan 1990). Indeed, three of these
LFTsAlb (V4 ), prothombin time, and bilirubinare used
in the modi ed ChildPugh classi cation, the classi cation
standard for severity of liver disease (Bodily and Fitz 1996;
Chopra 2001). In this classi cation, the severity level is determined by two physical ndings (ascites and encephalopathy)
and the three aforementioned LFTs. It should be noted that
Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) made no mention of the modi ed
ChildPugh classi cation and gave no data for the two critical LFTs (bilirubin and prothrombin time) for the patients
in this case study. The only critical LFT reported by Taguchi
and Rajesh (2000), that of Alb (V4 ), is consistently normal
(3.65.8 g/dL) in all 17 abnormal patients. In the modi ed
ChildPugh classi cation, an Alb (V4 ) level of 2.83.5 g/dL
is consistent with mild disease, whereas moderate or severe
disease is often found in patients with an Alb (V4 ) level less
than 2.8 g/dL (Bodily and Fitz 1996; Chopra 2001).
There are two general types of liver disease, acute and
chronic. In acute liver disease, the prominently abnormal
LFTs are the aminotransferases [e.g., GOT (V6 5], which
often exceed 500 IU and can frequently reach levels in the
thousands while most other tests remain normal for a while
(Kaplan 1990; Pratt and Kaplan 1999). In contrast, in chronic
liver failure, the aminotransferases [e.g., GOT (V6 5] and
transaminases [e.g., GPT (V7 5] increase minimally to less than
500 IU, whereas the remaining LFTs are variable, according
to the underlying pathology.
In chronic liver disease, three major subtypes can be
identi ed: chronic hepatocellular disorders (e.g., cirrhosis or
alcoholic liver disease), cholestasis (e.g., obstruction), and
in ltrative disorders (e.g., tumors or tuberculosis). Each of
TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

these subcategories has a speci c pattern of presentation. In

the case of hepatocellular disorder, an Alb (V4 ) level below
3.0 g/dL and an abnormally prolonged prothrombin time, with
only minimally increased aminotransferases [e.g., GOT (V6 5]
to a level below 300 IU is the norm. A ratio of GPT/GOT
above 2.0 strongly suggests alcoholic liver disease in that
setting (Clermont and Chalmers 1967). Whereas 70% of
patients with alcoholic liver disease have GPT/GOT above
2.0, this is encountered in only 5% or less of patients with
other disorders (Cohen and Kaplan 1979).
In the cholestatic form of liver disease, the pattern is different. There, the Alp (V9 ) is usually elevated out of proportion
with other enzymes. Values exceeding four times the normal
level suggest cholestasis (Pratt and Kaplan 1999). Because
Alp (V9 ) has a close linear relation with serum r-glutamyl
transpeptidase [r-GPT (V10 )], it is logical to look for similar
changes in r-GPT (V10 ) (Whit eld et al. 1972). If Alp (V9 ) is
elevated and r-GPT is not, then one would assume that Alp
(V9 ) is not of liver origin (probably of bone disease origin).
Aminotransferases [e.g., GOT (V6 )] are usually elevated to
levels up to 300 IU, with values exceeding 500 IU being rare.
In cases of in ltrative liver disease, the pattern is closer to
that seen with obstruction. Often, the earliest and only abnormal test is Alp (V9 ). Aminotransferases [e.g., GOT (V6 )] are
normal or minimally elevated, and so are Alb (V4 ) and prothrombin time (Pratt and Kaplan 1999).
Of all LFTs (variables) in the patients dataset used for this
case study, the most relevant ones for liver disease diagnosis
and classi cation are Alb (V4 ), GOT (V6 ), GPT (V7 ), Alp (V9 ),
and r-GPT (V10 ). The data results for the LFTs V3 , V5 , V8 ,
and V11 V17 are not directly relevant to liver disease. From
the foregoing medical discussion and the case study data, it
is quite clear that while abnormal patients 1517 seem to
exhibit some chronic hepatocellular disease (e.g., cirrhosis or
alcoholic liver disease), all other patients, both normal and
abnormal, do not seem to exhibit any notable liver disease.
In fact, it is quite doubtful that any patient participating in this
case study has any signi cant liver disease, certainly not acute,
because no patient has an Alb (V4 ) level below 3.5 g/dL.
Although some of the abnormal patients 114 could exhibit
some extremely weak signs of chronic cholestasis (e.g.,
obstuction) or in ltrative disorders (e.g., tumors), such a
diagnosis would certainly require additional results from
the two critical LFTs (bilirubin and prothrombin time) and
would bene t from some physical ndings (e.g., ascites), as
suggested in the modi ed ChildPugh classi cation method.
However, these data are not available for the case study.
Moreover, the use of only 17 abnormal patients is an
extremely small sample for liver disease diagnosis and
classi cation, given the highly diverse number of disorders
attributed to liver disease.
Finally, it is important to note that cluster analysis, which
was applied to the ve most relevant LFTs (variables)
Alb (V4 ), GOT (V6 ), GPT (V7 ), Alp (V9 ), and r-GPT (V10 ) (for
the combined sample of male and female patients), yielded
an optimal number of two clusters. One cluster grouped
together the normal patients with abnormal patients, 114,
whereas the second cluster consisted of the three abnormal
patients, 1517. That is, the results of cluster analysis are

THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM

in full agreement with a careful medical diagnosis based on

the data available for the case study. When the MTS analysis
was similarly applied to these same ve most relevant LFTs
for both 8 and 32 runs, however, the results were consistent,
but different from the results of the cluster analysis and the
medical diagnosis. This suggests that in this case, the problem
with the MTS analysis is connected with the use of the S/N
ratio measure rather than the interaction issue from the OA.
In general, however, both of these issues can cause problems.
5. OTHER ASPECTS OF THE
MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM
Taguchi et al. (2001) presented several other methods in the
MTS framework. We summarize these in this section.

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

5.1

Forecasting

Taguchi et al. (2001, chap. 3) presented an application of

the MTS to evaluate the amount of credit that should be
extended to applicants. The MTS is proposed as an alternative
to credit-scoring methods. Taguchi et al. (2001, p. 25) stated
that traditional methods in this area have not been successful,
because only people who defaulted on loans were studied.
Data on good customers is routinely used to build creditscoring models, however, as discussed by Reichert, Cho, and
Wagner (1983).
In the MTS approach, the values of Mj represent losses to
the company due to unpaid bills. The regression model in (3)
is tted, and the loss corresponding to an applicant with an
MD value of D 2 is estimated to be
p
O
M D D=O 34 MSE=50
This practice of using a tted regression line to estimate the
value of an unobserved independent variable corresponding
to an observed value of the dependent variable is called
calibration in the statistical literature. Brownlee (1965,
pp. 361362) discussed the calibration problem speci cally
for a line through the origin. As discussed by Mee and
Eberhardt (1996), the statistical approach to this problem
accounts for the error in estimating the variance and the slope
of the line. This sampling variation is ignored in the MTS.
5.2

Use in Clinical Trials

Taguchi et al. (2001, chap. 5) pointed out that clinical trials involve large numbers of subjects, require quite a long
time, and are very expensive. The two reasons given for this
are the large individual differences between patients and the
use of attribute data, not continuous variables. It is stated
that if continuous variables, such as the MD, could be used,
then the study could be conducted by observing only one or
two patients in a short period. Statisticians would nd this
claim astounding, because clinical trials must have sample
sizes suf ciently large for investigators to measure effectiveness relative to other treatments, determine dosage, assess the
side effects of the treatment being studied, and to determine
which types of patients in a very heterogeneous population
bene t most from the treatment. Taguchi et al. (2001, p. 4)
considered use of the MTS in clinical trials to be its most
exciting potential application.

Taguchi et al. (2001, chap. 5) proposed a method for comparing the effectiveness of two treatments. Only one patient
is used for each treatment. The MD values of each patient
are recorded over time during treatment. The MD values of
the two patients are scaled using the corresponding initial
MD values, and regression equations are tted to show the
changes in the transformed MD values over time. The treatments are compared by comparing the estimated slopes of
the two lines. In statistical terminology, this corresponds to
a repeated-measurements experiment for two treatments, but
with only one subject in each treatment group. Statisticians
would never recommend this practice, however, because variation between subjects cannot be assessed. The treatment effect
is confounded with the difference between subjects.
5.3

Use of Principal Components

Taguchi and Rajesh (2000) pointed out that in some applications of the MTS, there are two types of abnormalities present.
For example, in the graduate student admission process there
could be very good, as well as very bad, applicants. Thus,
they noted that it is important to identify the direction of the
abnormality. They stated further that this cannot be done with
the MD values calculated using the inverse of the correlation
matrix, but it can be done using the GramSchmidt orthogonalization process.
The GramSchmidt process is recommended for obtaining
a set of mutually perpendicular vectors from a set of linearly
independent standardized original vectors. It appears that this
is a recommendation for obtaining the values of the principal
components of the abnormal items based on the correlation
matrix of the normal group. The discussion is not clear, however, for several reasons. First, the classi cation into the good
and bad categories is based on the signs of the principal components. Often this would not be any more helpful than using
the signs of the standardized original variables. Second, the
threshold of the MD values shown on bivariate plots should
correspond to an ellipse, but instead linear limits are drawn.
Third, the axes, corresponding to what appear to be the principal components in the bivariate plots, are not drawn along
the major and minor axes of the MD contour ellipse and are
not centered at the origin, as would be expected.
6.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

As statisticians, we much prefer the multivariate statistical approaches based on underlying probability models to the
MTS. Mahalanobis (1950) also greatly valued the use of probability, stating that statistics supplies the basis for choosing a
particular course of action in practical problems by balancing
the risks of gain and loss using the calculus of probability. He
also held that the cross-examination of the data was the rst
responsibility of the statistician (Mahalanobis 1965). Questioning the validity of the data and the use of exploratory data
analysis is not mentioned as part of the MTS.
Statistical methods are better designed to account for
variation between units in the groups and to account for
sampling variation. The MTS does not adequately address
the issue of variation between items, because this variation
TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

10

WILLIAM H. WOODALL ET AL.

typically results in at least some classi cation errors, when a

classi cation rule is developed from a dataset. This lack of
attention to variation between units is most evident in the MTS
clinical trials methods, in which variation between individuals is completely ignored. In addition, sampling variation is
ignored in the decision rules involving the S/N ratios and in
the calibration problem involving prediction of an Mj value
based on the value of MD.
It should be noted that some of the application areas mentioned for the MTS have been studied extensively in the
statistics and other subject matter literature, including medical
diagnosis and credit scoring. These bodies of work are ignored
in the development of the MTS approaches.
From the case study presented in Section 4, the MTS analysis based on the S/N ratio in (5) does not necessarily lead to
a good MD scale in that separation between the classes with
different severities of abnormality can be very poor. Of course,
it is possible to use a more effective search algorithm than that
based on the OA and to modify the S/N ratio. Even with such
modi cations, however, we believe that there are still important unresolved conceptual issues with the MTS, and that with

further development of the basic approach, one would eventually need to incorporate methods based on probability. Despite
such serious shortcomings, however, we expect the MTS to
become more widely used in industry. Many practitioners will
understand the advantages of using multivariate data, but will
lack the expertise required to implement statistical approaches.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The research of W. H. Woodall, R. Koudelik, K.-L. Tsui,
and S. B. Kim was partially supported by National Science
Foundation-DMI grant 9908013. K.-L. Tsuis work was also
partially supported by The Logistic InstituteAsia Paci c,
Singapore. The work of Z. G. Stoumbos was funded in part
by the Law School Admission Council (LSAC) and by a
2001 Rutgers Faculty of Management Research Fellowship.
The opinions and conclusions contained in this publication
are those of the authors and do not necessarily re ect the
position or policy of LSAC. We thank Rajesh Jugulum and
Genichi Taguchi for providing the medical case study dataset
and allowing us to distribute it. We also thank the referees and
the associate editor for their helpful comments.

APPENDIX: DOTPLOTS FOR THE MEDICAL DATA VARIABLES

(Status: Healthy D 1, mild disease D 2; medium disease D 3)

Status

20

30

40

50

60

V1 Age
Figure A.1.

Dotplot of V1 (Age) by Patient Status.

Status

V2 Gender
Each dot represents up to 3 observations.

Figure A.2. Dotplot of V2 (Gender) by Patient Status.

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

10

THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM

11

Status

V3 TP

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

Figure A.3.

Dotplot of V3 (Total Protein) by Patient Status.

Status

3.8

4.8

5.8

3.8

4.8

5.8

V4 Alb
Figure A.4. Dotplot of V4 (Albumin) by Patient Status.

Status

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

V5 ChE
Figure A.5. Dotplot of V5 (Cholinesterase) by Patient Status.

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

12

WILLIAM H. WOODALL ET AL.

3

Status

50

100

150

V6 GOT

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

Figure A.6.

Dotplot of V6 (Glutamate O Transaminase) by Patient Status.

Status

20

70

120

170

V7 GPT
Figure A.7. Dotplot of V7 (Glutamate P Transaminase) by Patient Status.

Status

100

200

300

400

V8 LHD
Figure A.8. Dotplot of V8 (Lactic Dehydrogenase) by Patient Status.

Status

100

200

300

V9 Alp
Figure A.9.

Dotplot of V9 (Alkaline Phosphatase) by Patient Status.

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM

13

Status

00

200

V10 r-GPT

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

Figure A.10. Dotplot of V10 (r-Glutamyl Transpeptidase) by Patient Status.

Status

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

V11 LAP
Figure A.11. Dotplot of V11 (Leucine Aminopeptidase) by Patient Status.

Status

100

200

300

V12 TCh
Figure A.12.

Dotplot of V12 (Total Cholesterol) by Patient Status.

Status

100

200

300

400

V13 TG
Figure A.13. Dotplot of V13 (Triglyceride) by Patient Status.

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

14

WILLIAM H. WOODALL ET AL.

Status

150

250

350

V14 PL

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

Figure A.14. Dotplot of V14 (Phospholipid) by Patient Status.

Status

1.0

1.5

2.0

V15 Cr
Figure A.15. Dotplot of V15 (Creatinine) by Patient Status.

Status

13

18

V16 BUN
Figure A.16. Dotplot of V16 (Blood Urea Nitrogen) by Patient Status.

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1

23

THE MAHALANOBISTAGUCHI SYSTEM

15

Status

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

6.5

7.5

8.5

V17 UA
Figure A.17. Dotplot of V17 (Uric Acid) by Patient Status.

[Received August 2001. Revised December 2001.]

Downloaded by [University of Central Florida] at 20:20 25 February 2016

REFERENCES
Adams, B. M., and Woodall, W. H. (1989), An Analysis of Taguchis
On-Line Process Control Method Under a Random Walk Model, Technometrics, 31, 401413.
Albert, A., and Harris, E. K. (1987), Multivariate Interpretation of Clinical
Laboratory Data, New York: Marcel Dekker.
Begg, C. B. (1991), Advances in Statistical Methodology for Diagnostic
Medicine in the 1980s, Statistics in Medicine, 10, 18871895.
Bodily, K. O., and Fitz, J. G. (1996), Approach to the Patient with Suspected
Liver Disease, in Current Diagnosis & Treatment in Gastroenterology,
eds. J. H. Grendell, K. R. McQuaid, and S. L. Friedman, Stamford, CT:
Appleton & Lange, pp. 461474.
Box, G. E. P. (1996), The Role of Statistics in Quality and Productivity
Improvement, Journal of Applied Statistics, 23, 320.
Brownlee, K. A. (1965), Statistical Theory and Methodology in Science and
Engineering, New York: Wiley.
Chopra, S. (2001), Diagnostic Approach to the Patient with Cirrhosis, UpToDate (www.uptodate.com), 9, 16.
Clermont, R. J., and Chalmers, T. C. (1967), The Transaminase Tests in
Liver Disease, Medicine, 46, 197207.
Cohen, J. A., and Kaplan, M. M. (1979), The SGOT/SGPT Ratio: An Indicator of Alcoholic Liver Disease, Digestive Diseases and Sciences, 24,
835839.
Harris, E. K. (1981), Statistical Aspects of Reference Values in Clinical
Pathology, in Progress in Clinical Pathology VIII, eds. M. Stefanini and
E. Benson, New York: Grune and Stratton, pp. 4566.
Kanetaka, T. (1990), Diagnosis of a Special Health Check Using Mahalanobis Distance, ASI Journal, 3.
Kaplan, M. M. (1990), Evaluation of Hepatobiliary Disease, in Internal
Medicine, (3rd ed.), eds. J. H. Stein et al., Boston, MA: Little, Brown, p. 443.
Lunani, M., Nair, V. N., and Wasserman, G. S. (1997), Graphical Methods for Robust Design with Dynamic Characteristics, Journal of Quality
Technology, 29, 327338.
N 10, 195228.
Mahalanobis, P. C. (1950), Why Statistics?, Sankhya,
(1965), Statistics as a Key Technology, The American Statistician,
19, 4346.
Mee, R. W., and Eberhardt, K. (1996), A Comparison of Uncertainty Criteria
for Calibration, Technometrics, 38, 221229.
Montgomery, D. C. (1992), The Use of Statistical Process Control and
Design of Experiments in Product and Process Improvement, IIE Transactions, 24, 417.

Nair, V. N. (ed.) (1992), Taguchis Parameter Design: A Panel Discussion,

Technometrics, 34, 127161.
National Library of Medicine (2001), MEDLINEplus Health Information
(www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus), May, 16, 2001.
Nayebpour, M. R., and Woodall, W. H. (1993), An Analysis of Taguchis
On-Line Quality Monitoring Procedures for Attributes, Technometrics, 35,
5360.
Neuschwander-Tetri, B. A. (1995), Common Blood Tests for Liver Disease,
Postgraduate Medicine, 98, 4963.
Pratt, D. S., and Kaplan, M. M. (1999), Evaluation of the Liver. A. Laboratory Tests, in Schiffs Diseases of the Liver (5th ed.), eds. E. R.
Schiff, M. F. Sorrell, W. C. Maddrey, Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven,
pp. 205244.
Reichert, A. K., Cho, C.-C., and Wagner, G. M. (1983), An Examination
of the Conceptual Issues Involved in Developing Credit-Scoring Models,
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 1, 101114.
Sahai, H., and Khurshid, A. (1991), Mathematical and Statistical Models in
Computer-Assisted Medical Diagnosis: An Overview and a Selected Bibliography, Journal of Clinical Computing, 20, 3381.
Taguchi, G. (1981), On-Line Quality Control During Production, Tokyo:
Japanese Standards Association.
Taguchi, S., Chowdhury, S., and Taguchi, S. (2000), Robust Engineering,
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Taguchi, G., Chowdhury, S., and Wu, Y. (2001), The MahalanobisTaguchi
System, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Taguchi, G., Elsayed, E. A., and Hsiang, T. (1989), Quality Engineering in
Production Systems, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Taguchi, G., and Rajesh, J. (2000), New Trends in Multivariate Diagnosis,
N 62, 233248.
Sankhya,
Taguchi, G., and Wu, Y. (1980), Introduction to Off-Line Quality Control,
Nagoya, Japan: Japan Quality Control Organization.
Tracy, N. D., Young, J. C., and Mason, R. L. (1992), Multivariate Control
Charts for Individual Observations, Journal of Quality Technology, 24,
8895.
Tsui, K.-L. (1996), A Critical Look at Taguchis Modeling Approach for
Robust Design, Journal of Applied Statistics, 23, 8195.
(1999), Response Model Analysis of Dynamic Robust Design Experiments, IIE Transactions, 31, 11131122.
Whit eld, J. B., Pounder, R. E., Neale, G., and Moss, D. W. (1972), Serum
-Glytamyl Transpeptidase Activity in Liver Disease, Gut, 13, 702708.
Wu, C. F. J., and Hamada, M. (2000), Experiments: Planning, Analysis, and
Parameter Design Optimization, New York: Wiley.
Zielezny, M., and Dunn, O. J. (1975), Cost Evaluation of a Two-Stage Classi cation Procedure, Biometrics, 31, 3747.

TECHNOMETRICS, FEBRUARY 2003, VOL. 45, NO. 1