Raman Nautiyal, Neeraj Tiwari, Girish Chandra, John A. Kershaw, Jr., Trishla Shaktan


Ranked Set Sampling (RSS) is a sampling strategy which is advantageous when measurement of sampling units is very difficult but when small sets of units can be ranked according to other methods that do not require actual measurements. The units corresponding to each rank are used in RSS and RSS performs better than simple random sampling (SRS) when estimating the population mean of forestry or environmental parameters (say, below ground biomass). A new RSS procedure based on alternate order statistics for estimating the population mean (ARSS) is suggested in this paper. ARSS measures only the first, third, fifth and so on units so that the information on remaining order statistics is captured from their respective neighboring order statistics. The bias correction term in the proposed estimator is included and calculated for some skewed and symmetric (both mound and U shaped) distributions. The estimators under ARSS are then compared to the estimators based on balanced RSS and Neyman’s optimal unbalanced RSS allocations. Based on the computed Relative Precisions, estimators based on ARSS are recommended for even set sizes of skewed distributions and odd set sizes of mound shaped symmetric distributions. RPs of these distributions are uniformly better than the other two methods (balanced and Neyman’s RSS). To demonstrate the performance of the different estimators, an example from forestry that estimates total biomass of three tree species is presented. The proposed method is efficient in forestry and environmental applications.


Above Ground Biomass; Ranked Set Sampling, Relative Precision, Distributions, Unbiasedness

Full Text:



Acharya, B., Bhattarai, G., Gier, A.D. and Stein, A. (2000). Systematic adaptive cluster sampling for the assessment of rare tree species in Nepal. Forest Ecology and Management, 137(1-3), 65-73.

Barnett, V. (1999). Ranked set sample design for environmental investigations. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 6, 59–74.

Bhoj, D.S. and Chandra, G. (2019). Simple unequal allocation procedure for ranked set sampling with skew distributions. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 18(2), eP2811. doi: 10.22237/jmasm/1604189700.

Chandra, G., Bhoj, D.S. and Pandey, R. (2018). Simple unbalanced ranked set sampling for mean estimation of response variable of developmental programs, Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 17(1). Article 28. DOI: 10.22237/jmasm/1543856083.

Chandra, G., Nautiyal, R. and Chandra, H. (Eds.) (2020). Statistical methods and applications in forestry and environmental sciences, Springer, Singapore.

Chandra, G., Tiwari, N. and Chandra, H. (2011). Adaptive cluster sampling based on ranked sets. MetodoloskiZvezki (Advances in Methodology and Statistics), 8(1), 39-55.

Chandra, G., Tiwari, N. and Nautiyal, R. (2015). Near optimal allocation models for symmetric distributions in ranked set sampling. In Chandra, G., Nautiyal, R., Chandra, H., Roychoudury, N and Mohammad, N. (Eds.), Statistics in Forestry: Methods and Applications. Bonfring, Coimbatore. pp. 85-90.

Chandra, G., Tiwari, N. and Nautiyal, R. (2019). Two stage adaptive cluster sampling based on ordered statistics. Metodoloski Zvezki (Advances in Methodology and Statistics), 16(1), 43-60.

Cobby, J.M., Ridout, M.S., Bassett, P.J. and Large, R.V. (1985). An investigation into the use of ranked set sampling on grass and grass-clover swards. Grass and Forage Science, 40, 257-263.

Evans, M.J. (1967). Application of ranked set sampling to regeneration surveys in areas direct-seeded to longleaf pine. Masters Thesis, School of Forestry and Wildlife Management, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.

Grosenbaugh, L.R. (1963). Some suggestions for better sample-tree measurements. Soc. Am. Forest Proc. 36–42.

Grosenbaugh, L.R. (1965). Three-pee sampling theory and program ‘THRP’ for computer generation of selection criteria. U.S. For. Serv. Res. Pap. PSW-21.

Halls, L.K., and Dell, T.R. (1966). Trials of ranked set sampling for forage yields. Forest Science, 12, 22-26.

Harter, H.L. and Balakrishnan, N. (1996). CRC handbook of tables for the use of order statistics in estimation, CRC Press, Boca Raton, New York.

Hastings, C. Jr., Mosteller, F., Tukey, J.W. and Winsor, C.P. (1947). Low moments for small samples: A comparative study of order statistics. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18(3), 413-426.

Iles, K. (2003). A sampler of inventory topics. 2nd ed. Kim Iles and Associates, Nanaimo, BC. 869 p.

Kaur, A., Patil, G.P. and Taillie, C. (1997). Unequal allocation models for ranked set sampling with skew distributions. Biometrics, 53, 123-130.

Kaur, A., Patil, G.P. and Taillie, C. (2000). Optimal allocation for symmetric distributions in ranked sampling. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 52(2), 239-254.

Kershaw, J. A., Jr., Ducey, M. J., Beers, T. W. and Husch, B. (2016). Forest Mensuration. 5th ed. Wiley/Blackwell, Hobokin, NJ. 640 p.

Kumar, A., Chandra, G. and Kumar, S. (2019). Estimating bark eating caterpillars Indarbelaquadrinotata (Walker) in Populous deltoides using ranked set sampling. Indonesian Journal of Applied Statistics, 3(1), 1-11.

Kvam, P.H. (2003). Ranked set sampling based on binary water quality data with covariates. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 8, (3), 271–279.

Latpate, R. Kshirsagar, J., Gupta, V.K. and Chandra, G. (2021). Advanced Sampling Methods, Springer, Singapore. 301 p.

Martin, W.L., Sharik, T.L., Oderwald, R.G. and Smith, D.W. (1980). Evaluation of ranked set sampling for estimating shrub phytomass in Appalachian oak forests. Blacksburg, Virginia: School of Forestry and Wildlife Resources, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, FWS, 4-80.

McIntyre, G.A. (1952). A method for unbiased selective sampling using ranked sets. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 3, 385-390.

Mode, N., Conquest, L. and Marker, D. (1999). Ranked set sampling for ecological research: Accounting for the total cost of sampling. Environmetrics, 10, 179–194.

Nelson, L.E., Switzer, G.L and Lockaby, B.G. (1987). Nutrition of Populus deltoides plantations during maximum production. Forest Ecology and Management, 20(1-2), 25–41.

Platt, W.J. Evans, G.W. and Rathbun, S.L. (1988). The population dynamics of a long-lived conifer Pinus palustris. American Naturalist, 131(4), 491–525.

Sarhan, A.E. and Greenberg, B.G. (eds.) (1962). Contributions to order statistics, John Wiley.

Tarr, A.B., Moore, K.J. Burras, C.L., Bullock, D.G. and Dixon, P.M. (2005). Improving map accuracy of soil variables using soil electrical conductivity as a covariate. Precision Agriculture, 6 (3), 255–270.

Thompson, S.K. (1990). Adaptive cluster sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 85, 1050-1059.

Thompson, S.K. (2012). Sampling. 3rd ed. Wiley, New York. 472 p. (p. 147).

Tiwari, N. and Chandra, G. (2011). A systematic procedure for unequal allocation for skewed distributions in ranked set sampling. Journal of the Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics, 65(3), 331-338.

Wang, Y.G., Ye, Y. and Milton D.A. (2009). Efficient designs for sampling and subsampling in fisheries research based on ranked sets. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66 (5), 928–934.

Yang, T.R., Kershaw, J.A., Jr., Weiskittel, A.R., Lam, T.Y. and McGarrigle, E. (2019). Influence of sample selection design and estimation method on sample size requirements for LiDAR-assisted forest inventories. Forestry. 92, 311–323.


  • There are currently no refbacks.


© 2008 Mathematical and Computational Forestry & Natural-Resource Sciences