This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Introduction
In modelling heavy-tailed data sets, the Generalized Pareto distribution is a very significant distribution with its applications in environmental studies, finance, operation risk, and insurance. The Generalized Pareto distribution was first familiarized while making inferences on the upper tail of a distribution by Pickands [2]. The distribution is sometimes termed as the “peaks over thresholds” model as it is used for modelling exceedances over threshold level in flood control. In particular, the Generalized Pareto distribution is used to model extreme values. This application of the Generalized Pareto distribution was debated by several authors, for instance, Gupta et al. [3], Hogg et al. [4], Hosking and Wallis [5], Smith [6–8], Davison [9], and Davison and Smith [10]. Smith [8] presented an excellent review of the two most widely used methods in this field, based on generalized extreme value distributions and on the Generalized Pareto distribution. Davison and Smith [10] discussed the applications of Generalized Pareto distribution using river-flow exceedances and used it as a model for excesses over thresholds. Its applications include the upper atmosphere ozone levels, environmental extreme events, large fluctuation in financial data, large insurance claims, and reliability studies. The applications of Generalized Pareto distribution are addressed in various books, such as by Castillo et al. [11] and Kotz and Nadarajah [12]. A number of researchers fit the Generalized Pareto distribution for exceedances over a series of thresholds and have used the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Anderson–Darling statistics for testing the fit. Various authors claimed the flexibility in modelling long tail data using the Generalized Pareto distribution that includes Choulakian and Stephens [13]. This provides the motivation for proposing another flexible generalization of the Generalized Pareto distribution, referred to as the Khalil Extended Generalized Pareto (KEGP) distribution. The suggested generalization of Generalized Pareto aims the following:
(i) To produce a flexible extension of the Generalized Pareto distribution
(ii) To adapt various forms of the hazard function such as increasing, decreasing, and upside-down failure rate functions
(iii) To produce more flexibility in modelling extreme value data
(iv) To extend the considered distribution to a variety of data related to reliability and survival analysis
The rest of the manuscript is organized as follows: In Section 2, the KEGP distribution is defined with a special case of the distribution. In Section 3, some important properties are investigated for instance moments, moment-generating function, entropies, order statistics, and quantile function for the KEGP model. Section 4 is devoted to parametric estimation using the maximum likelihood method. In Section 5, application of the KEGP model is provided using bladder cancer patients’ data and average wind speed data sets. The simulation study is also performed for the parameters using the Monte Carlo simulation method. The paper is concluded finally with some remarks on the results and their significance in Section 6.
2. Khalil Extended Generalized Pareto (KEGP)
Salahuddin et al. [1] proposed a very flexible family of distribution, known as the Khalil new generalized family, whose CDF is defined as
Pickands [2] suggested the Generalized Pareto distribution with the cumulative distribution function and probability density function in the following form:
In the above density,
Now, we shall define the Khalil Extended Generalized Pareto distribution using equation (2) in the generator defined in equation (1), that is, if the Generalized Pareto distribution is distributed as
The probability density function, reliability function, and hazard function are
Figures 1–3 demonstrate the graphs of CDF, PDF, and hazard rate functions, respectively. From Figure 2, it can be clearly seen that as the values of the shape parameters
2.1. Special Case
As a special case if we substitute
3. Statistical Properties of KEGPD
The statistical properties of the KEGP distribution are as follows.
3.1. Moments
Let a random variable x follow the KEGP distribution; then, the rth moment of the KEGP distribution, say
Using the exponent series as
Now, here we will proof the above rth moment for three cases as follows:
Case-I: when
If we suppose
where
Case-II: when
Now, here if we suppose
where
Case-III: if
3.2. Moment-Generating Function (MGF)
If a random variable
The Taylor series yields the following simplified expression:
Using equations (11), (12), and (14) in (15), we get
3.3. Entropy Measures
For measuring the randomness of various systems, entropy measures are widely used. The main usage of these entropies is in the areas of physics, sparse kernel density estimation, and molecular imaging of tumors. If the result of entropy statistics is low, it specifies less uncertainty in the data. Thus, the Renyi [15] and q-entropy [16] are considered for the KEGP distribution to measure the quantity of uncertainty in the data. The entropies are characterized as
For
On solving and using the exponent series as
When
The q-entropy familiarized by [16] is defined as
Consider the integral
Using the result of the above integral in
Now, substituting the result in
3.4. Quantile Function
The quantile function or random number generator of the KEGP can be obtained by inverting
3.5. Order Statistics
Order statistics plays a vital role in the field of reliability and survival analysis. Let a random sample
Using equations (4) and (5) in (29), we have
4. Parameter Estimation of KEGP Distribution
The parametric estimation of the KEGP distribution is presented in this section using the technique of maximum likelihood since it possesses many desirable properties, for instance, consistency, invariance, and normal approximation. It basically depends upon the maximization of the likelihood function.
4.1. Maximum Likelihood Estimation
Let us consider a random sample
The log likelihood function of the KEGP model is obtained by taking the logarithm on both sides of (20) as
For MLEs of the unknown parameters of the KEGP model, the nonlinear equation derived above is simplified by taking its derivative w.r.t. to
4.2. Asymptotic Confidence Intervals
Since the expression of the MLEs cannot be derived in closed form, for the solution, some iterative procedures such as conjugate gradient type algorithms may be used to obtain the numerical solution. Thus, the asymptotic confidence interval can be derived for the unknown parameters
Thus, the asymptotic confidence intervals
5. Applications
The applications of the KEGP distribution are provided in the following section using simulated data and two real data sets.
5.1. Simulation Study
A simulation study is performed to obtain the average values of MLEs (maximum likelihood estimators), MSEs (mean square error), and bias. The following steps are used to perform the simulation.
Step 1.
First, suppose the values of the parameters from KEGP as
Step 2.
The process is repeated 10,000 times and the MSE and bias are computed for the estimates for n = 50, 100, 500, and 1000.
Step 3.
Use the following quantile expression for the generation of random numbers from KEGP as
Also, the bias and MSEs are calculated using the following expression:
Table 1
Average values of MLEs, MSEs, and bias.
Parameters | n | MSE ( | MSE ( | MSE ( | MSE ( | Bias ( | Bias ( | Bias ( | Bias ( | ||||
α = 2 | 50 | 2.8224 | 4.379 | 2.3862 | 0.8891 | 9.7413 | 4.8344 | 1.7391 | 1.4604 | 0.8224 | 1.3790 | 0.3861 | −0.1108 |
100 | 3.1228 | 3.662 | 2.5394 | 1.3173 | 12.444 | 3.05902 | 2.7910 | 3.1806 | 1.1227 | 0.6621 | 0.5394 | 0.31731 | |
500 | 2.2947 | 3.561 | 2.1699 | 0.9298 | 1.9501 | 1.6631 | 0.4103 | 0.2884 | 0.2947 | 0.5608 | 0.1699 | −0.07019 | |
1000 | 2.1720 | 3.567 | 2.0977 | 0.8734 | 0.8316 | 1.4808 | 0.1583 | 0.18722 | 0.1720 | 0.5671 | 0.0977 | −0.1265 | |
α = 3 | 50 | 4.0408 | 4.0485 | 2.5181 | 1.7219 | 23.3680 | 3.5219 | 2.9016 | 4.739 | 1.0408 | 0.0485 | 0.5181 | 0.7219 |
100 | 3.5614 | 4.5961 | 2.2183 | 1.4225 | 11.0102 | 4.4791 | 1.4747 | 2.3068 | 0.5614 | 0.5961 | 0.2183 | 0.4225 | |
500 | 2.7675 | 4.7689 | 1.9365 | 0.9259 | 1.7499 | 3.3965 | 0.2129 | 0.3039 | −0.2325 | 0.7689 | −0.0634 | −0.0741 | |
1000 | 2.9827 | 4.6298 | 1.9992 | 0.9457 | 0.9594 | 2.628 | 0.1312 | 0.2547 | −0.0173 | 0.6298 | −0.0007 | −0.0543 | |
α = 1 | 50 | 2.0367 | 2.525 | 5.2304 | 4.2390 | 23.9711 | 2.8856 | 12.220 | 17.477 | 1.0367 | 0.5254 | 1.2304 | 1.2390 |
100 | 2.2980 | 2.549 | 5.3530 | 3.9130 | 11.1434 | 1.5055 | 12.8912 | 20.7428 | 1.2980 | 0.54924 | 1.3530 | 0.9130 | |
500 | 1.3429 | 2.372 | 4.2849 | 3.4199 | 1.1744 | 1.0608 | 1.0958 | 7.5208 | 0.3430 | 0.3724 | 0.2849 | 0.41989 | |
1000 | 1.1563 | 2.364 | 4.1010 | 3.0019 | 0.3420 | 0.9178 | 0.1650 | 4.0866 | 0.1563 | 0.3640 | 0.1010 | 0.0019 | |
α = 1 | 50 | 3.171 | 3.2678 | 3.3261 | 4.5144 | 34.1379 | 5.7604 | 10.7224 | 19.5879 | 2.1711 | 1.2678 | 1.3261 | −0.4855 |
100 | 2.545 | 3.0713 | 3.201 | 4.876 | 29.092 | 4.651 | 6.1187 | 25.225 | 1.5452 | 1.0713 | 1.2011 | −0.1243 | |
500 | 2.2187 | 2.511 | 2.7985 | 4.8092 | 9.6056 | 1.4914 | 3.2420 | 10.3409 | 1.2187 | 0.5110 | 0.7985 | −0.1908 | |
1000 | 1.6832 | 2.2812 | 2.457 | 4.791 | 4.4161 | 0.4660 | 1.5554 | 5.3746 | 0.6832 | 0.2812 | 0.4569 | −0.2091 |
5.2. Real-Life Applications
The practicality of the KEGP is demonstrated by using two real-life data sets. The first data set is considered from [17], and the second data set is taken from [18]. The KEGP is compared with various submodels such as Kumaraswamy Pareto [19], Alpha Power Pareto [20], Generalized Pareto [2], and Exponentiated Generalized Pareto [21] distributions with the following probability density functions:
(i) Kumaraswamy Pareto (KP) distribution:
(ii) Alpha Power Pareto (APP):
(iii) Generalized Pareto (GP):
(iv) Exponentiated Generalized Pareto (EGP):
The performance of the KEGP is checked by comparing it with various forms of Pareto distributions discussed above using the goodness-of-fit test criteria. A package of R software, that is, Adequacy Model, is utilized which includes the outcome of Akaike’s Information Criteria (AIC), Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), Consistent Akaike’s Information Criteria (CAIC), Hannan–Quinn Information Criteria (HQIC),
Table 2
MLEs and standard errors (in parenthesis), K-S values, and
Model | MLEs of the parameter | K-S | |
KEGPD | −3.8740, 0.7348, 0.30490, 3.5039 (2.111, 0.519, 0.0891, 0.950) | 0.0342 | 0.9982 |
KP ( | 0.05109, 0.3212, 7.1078, 4.3484 (0.009, 0.042, 1.047, 1.373) | 0.1754 | 0.00075 |
APP | 1.3800, 0.6023 (0.500, 0.0579) | 1.808 | 2.2e − 16 |
GP | 8.8108, 0.0647 (1.039, 0.078) | 0.0941 | 0.2064 |
EGP | 20.4552, 8.3284 (6.464, 0.794) | 0.05002 | 0.9059 |
Table 3
MLEs and standard errors (in parenthesis), K-S values, and
Model | MLEs of the parameter | K-S | |
KEGPD | 0.8836, 7.9088, −0.1279, 3.4898 (5.816, 20.854, 0.836, 9.016) | 0.0835 | 0.4881 |
KP ( | 1.5574, 0.8636, 7.7916, 9.7403 (0.936, 6.909, 0.179, 3.9484) | 0.0940 | 0.3324 |
APP | 36.1665, 1.0601 (10.175, 0.068) | 0.3412 | 1.537e − 10 |
GP | 11.6718, −0.7904 (0.583, 0.037) | 0.2477 | 9.291e − 06 |
EGP | 49.9512, 4.0312 (11.410, 0.520) | 0.2685 | 1.086e − 06 |
Table 4
AIC, BIC, CAIC, HQIC, and -L for data set I.
Models | AIC | CAIC | BIC | HQIC | |
KEGPD | 830.0632 | 830.3884 | 841.4713 | 834.6984 | 411.0316 |
KP ( | 894.9182 | 895.2434 | 906.3263 | 899.5533 | 443.459 |
APP | 848.9063 | 849.0023 | 854.6103 | 851.2238 | 422.4531 |
GP | 833.7435 | 833.8395 | 839.4476 | 836.0611 | 414.8718 |
EGP | 842.0753 | 842.1713 | 847.7794 | 844.3929 | 419.0377 |
Table 5
AIC, BIC, CAIC, HQIC, and −L for data set II.
Models | AIC | CAIC | BIC | HQIC | |
KEGPD | 478.3736 | 478.7947 | 488.7943 | 482.5911 | 235.1868 |
KP | 480.2818 | 480.7029 | 490.7025 | 484.4992 | 236.6409 |
APP | 614.2206 | 614.3443 | 619.4309 | 616.3293 | 305.1103 |
GP | 537.4365 | 537.5602 | 542.6468 | 539.5452 | 266.7182 |
EGP | 527.2457 | 527.3694 | 532.456 | 529.3544 | 261.6228 |
5.2.1. Data Set I
The first data set is considered from [17], which consists of remission time (in months) of bladder cancer patients. The data set is positively skewed and unimodal, with a skewness of 3.286, mean remission time of 9.366 months, and standard deviation of 10.508 months. These data are recently studied in [22, 23] as follows: 0.08, 2.09, 3.48, 4.87, 6.94, 8.66, 13.11, 23.63, 0.2, 2.23, 3.52, 4.98, 6.97, 9.02, 13.29, 0.4, 2.26, 3.57, 5.06, 7.09, 9.22, 13.80, 25.74, 0.5, 2.46, 3.64, 5.09, 7.26, 9.47, 14.24, 25.82, 0.51, 2.54, 3.7, 5.17, 7.28, 9.74, 14.76, 26.31, 0.81, 2.26, 3.82, 5.32, 7.32, 10.06, 14.77, 32.15, 2.64, 3.88, 5.32, 7.39, 10.34, 14.83, 34.26, 0.09, 2.69, 4.18, 5.34, 7.59, 10.66, 15.96, 36.66, 1.05, 2.69, 4.23, 5.41, 7.62, 10.75, 16.62, 43.01, 1.19, 2.75, 4.26, 5.41, 7.63, 17.12, 46.12, 1.26, 2.83, 4.33, 5.49, 7.66, 11.25, 17.14, 79.05, 1.35, 2.87, 5.62, 7.87, 11.64, 17.36, 1.4, 3.02, 4.43, 5.71, 7.93, 11.79, 18.10, 1.46, 4.4, 5.85, 8.26, 11.98, 19.13, 1.76, 3.25, 4.5, 6.25, 8.37, 12.02, 2.2, 13.31, 4.51, 6.54, 8.53, 12.03, 20.28, 2.02, 3.36, 6.76, 12.07, 21.73, 2.07, 3.36, 6.93, 8.65, 12.63, 22.69.
5.2.2. Data Set II
Statistical methods are very helpful in estimating the random phenomena of wind speed. It is environment friendly and an alternative clean energy source in comparison with the fuels obtained from the fossil. It is a type of solar energy, which is determined by the Earth surface unequal heating. Wind speed probabilities are modelled with probability distribution as they are the important parameter of the wind power. Here, a data set is considered from the daily average wind speeds at Cairo city from [18] as follows: 3.5, 3.1, 3.8, 3.2, 3.2, 4.5, 5.6, 5.7, 4.9, 5.7, 4.3, 9.4, 9.3, 4.4, 2.7, 3.8, 4.9, 5.4, 4.9, 4.2, 5.4, 3.3, 6.9, 9.8, 10, 8, 5.6, 8.2, 9.4, 11.3, 9.4, 5.5, 4.9, 8.6, 5, 4.7, 3.8, 4.3, 6.7, 7.6, 13.3, 8.2, 5.8, 5.1, 7.8, 10.3, 9.3, 4.3, 7.4, 13.8, 10.7, 12, 8.9, 10.6, 6.8, 6.6, 11.1, 12.5, 14.4, 9.9, 4.8, 4.2, 5.5, 7.3, 12.4, 14.7, 6.4, 8.7, 5.2, 6.8, 5.6, 7.5, 7.7, 7.1, 6.1, 7.6, 5.8, 6.3, 12.2, 6, 3.5, 9.5, 8.8, 5.2, 5, 9.8, 8, 7.9, 6.8, 5.7, 7.3, 6.8, 4.7, 5.3, 9.6, 10.1, 7.3, 6.7, 5.4, 5.4.
6. Conclusion
A new and improved generalization of the Generalized Pareto distribution is proposed in this paper named as Khalil Extended Generalized Pareto distribution (KEGP). The new proposed generalization (KEGP) of the Generalized Pareto proved to be more flexible and suitable for monotone as well as nonmonotone life time data. In addition, it is observed that the hazard function of the new proposed KEGP model is more flexible in fitting monotonically increasing, decreasing, and various types of data. For the proposed model, various statistical properties are derived. The estimation of parameters is done using the famous method of maximum likelihood. Furthermore, the consistency of the parameters is proved using the Monte Carlo simulation method. Moreover, the practicality of the distribution is exemplified with the help of two real-life data sets. Finally, among the fitted models, the KEGP provided a better fit than its other submodels.
Authors’ Contributions
All authors have equally contributed to this paper.
Appendix
Elements of the observed variance-covariance Fisher information matrix:
[1] N. Salahuddin, A. Khalil, W. K. Mashwani, H. Shah, P. Jomsri, T. Panityakul, "A novel generalized family of distributions for engineering and life sciences data applications," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2021,DOI: 10.1155/2021/9949999, 2021.
[2] J. III. Pickands, "Statistical inference using extreme order statistics," Annals of Statistics, vol. 3 no. 1, pp. 119-131, DOI: 10.1214/aos/1176343003, 1975.
[3] R. C. Gupta, P. L. Gupta, R. D. Gupta, "Modeling failure time data by Lehman alternatives," Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, vol. 27 no. 4, pp. 887-904, DOI: 10.1080/03610929808832134, 1998.
[4] R. V. Hogg, J. W. McKean, A. T. Craig, Introduction to Mathematical Statistics, 2005.
[5] J. R. M. Hosking, J. R. Wallis, "Parameter and quantile estimation for the generalized pareto distribution," Technimetrics, vol. 29 no. 3, pp. 339-349, DOI: 10.1080/00401706.1987.10488243, 1987.
[6] R. L. Smith, "Threshold Methods for Sample Extremes," Statistical Extremes and Applications, 1984.
[7] R. L. Smith, "Extreme value analysis of environmental time series: an application to trend detection in ground-level ozone," Statistical Science, vol. 4, pp. 367-393, DOI: 10.1214/ss/1177012400, 1989.
[8] R. L. Smith, "Extreme value theory," Handbook of Applicable Mathematics, 1990.
[9] A. C. Davison, "Modelling excesses over high thresholds, with an application," Statistical Extremes and Applications, 1984.
[10] A. C. Davison, R. L. Smith, "Models for exceedances over high thresholds," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, vol. 52 no. 3, pp. 393-425, DOI: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1990.tb01796.x, 1990.
[11] E. Castillo, A. S. Hadi, N. Balakrishnan, J. M. Sarabia, Extreme Value and Related Models with Applications in Engineering and Science, 2005.
[12] S. Kotz, S. Nadarajah, Extreme Value Distributions: Theory and Applications, 2000.
[13] V. Choulakian, M. A. Stephens, "Goodness-of-fit tests for the generalized Pareto distribution," Technometrics, vol. 43 no. 4, pp. 478-484, DOI: 10.1198/00401700152672573, 2001.
[14] M. M. Ristić, S. Nadarajah, "A new lifetime distribution," Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, vol. 84 no. 1, pp. 135-150, 2014.
[15] A. Renyi, On Measures of Entropy and Information, pp. 547-561, 1961.
[16] J. Havarda, F. Charvat, "Quantification method in classification Processes: concept of structural α -entropy," Kybernetika, vol. 3 no. 1, pp. 30-35, 1967.
[17] E. T. Lee, J. Wang, Statistical Methods for Survival Data Analysis, 2003.
[18] M. G. Ghazal, H. M. Hasaballah, "Exponentiated Rayleigh distribution: a Bayes study using MCMC approach based on unified hybrid censored data," Journal of Advances in Mathematics, vol. 12 no. 12, pp. 6863-6880, 2017.
[19] M. B. Pereira, R. B. Silva, L. M. Zea, G. M. Cordeiro, "The Kumaraswamy Pareto Distribution," . https://arxiv.org/abs/1204.1389
[20] S. Ihtisham, A. Khalil, S. Manzoor, S. A. Khan, A. Ali, "Alpha-Power Pareto distribution: its properties and applications," PLoS One, vol. 14 no. 6,DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218027, 2019.
[21] S. Lee, J. H. Kim, "Exponentiated generalized Pareto distribution: properties and applications towards extreme value theory," Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, vol. 48 no. 8,DOI: 10.1080/03610926.2018.1441418, 2018.
[22] M. A. M. Safari, N. Masseran, M. H. Abdul Majid, "Robust reliability estimation for lindley distribution-A probability integral transform statistical approach," Mathematics, vol. 8 no. 9,DOI: 10.3390/math8091634, 2020.
[23] N. Alotaibi, "A new lifetime distribution: properties, copulas, applications, and different classical estimation methods," Complexity, vol. 2021,DOI: 10.1155/2021/6657172, 2021.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Copyright © 2021 Najma Salahuddin et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Abstract
In this paper, a new generalization of the Generalized Pareto distribution is proposed using the generator suggested in [1], named as Khalil Extended Generalized Pareto (KEGP) distribution. Various shapes of the suggested model and important mathematical properties are investigated that includes moments, quantile function, moment-generating function, measures of entropy, and order statistics. Parametric estimation of the model is discussed using the technique of maximum likelihood. A simulation study is performed for the assessment of the maximum likelihood estimates in terms of their bias and mean squared error using simulated sample estimates. The practical applications are illustrated via two real data sets from survival and reliability theory. The suggested model provided better fits than the other considered models.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details



1 Department of Statistics, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Women University, Peshawar, Pakistan
2 Department of Statistics, University of Peshawar, KPK, Peshawar, Pakistan
3 Institute of Numerical Sciences, Kohat University of Science & Technology, Kohat, Pakistan
4 Statistics Department, Faculty of Science, King Abdul-Aziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
5 Department of Mathematics, University of Malakand, KPK, Chakdara, Pakistan