{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01957446808510638, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002553191489361702, 'mean_word_length': 4.736585365853658, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Progressive mean control chart is not a special case of an exponentially weighted moving average control chart

The progressive mean (PM) statistic is based on a simple idea of accumulating information of each subgroup by calculating the average progressively. Its weighting structure is based on a subgroup number that changes arithmetically, which makes the PM chart unique and efficient compared with the existing classical memory control charts. In a recent article (see reference 1), it was claimed that the PM chart is a special case of the exponentially weighted moving average (EMWA) chart. In this article, it is shown that even though the PM statistic can be written in the form of an EWMA statistic, the variance of the PM statistic is different from that of the EWMA statistic. Consequently, the limits of the PM chart are different from that of the EWMA chart. Therefore, it is found that the PM chart is not a special case of the EWMA chart; hence, the claim in reference 1 is incorrect. Furthermore, it is pointed out in this paper that no adaptive property in the weighting parameter of the PM statistic exists, further contradicting the claim in reference 1.