Gamma Distribution: Table 5.7a, Table 5.7b, Table 5.8a and Table 5.8b are the synopsis of the results when one takes into account the gamma distribution for AS vs JC (SEL), BCJ vs BJC (SEL), AS vs JC (LINEX, a=+0.8) and BCJ vs BJC (LINEX, a=+0.8) instances respectively. For the SEL (AS vs JC, i.e., Table 5.7a) example the values of the parameters one assumes are w=(0.01, 0.02),, m=10. While for BCJ vs BJC under SEL (Table 5.7b) the corresponding values are w=(0.01, 0.02),,, m=4. When we switch over to the LINEX loss case, with a=+0.8, Table 5.8a summarizes the comparison of AS vs JC, for which we consider the parameter values, as w=(0.01, 0.02), , m=10. Finally the BCJ vs BJC comparison results are highlighted in Table 5.8b with w=(0.01, 0.02),, , m=10 as the parameter set for a=+0.8.

Extreme Value Distribution: The final two sets of tables, i.e., Table 5.9a, Table 5.9b and Table 5.10a, Table 5.10b highlight the findings for the simulation runs when the distribution is extreme valued. For the SEL bounded risk example, one considers a combination of (i) w=(0.007, 0.008),, m=10 and (ii) w=(0.007, 0.008),,, m=10 to evaluate the performance of (i) AS vs JC (Table 5.9a) and (ii) BCJ vs BJC (Table 5.9b) multi stage sampling methods respectively. We assume the asymmetric, i.e., LINEX, loss function with a fixed level of bounded risk, i.e., w=+0.05. Our aim is to study the effect of change of a, i.e., shape parameter of the LINEX loss, on the sample size as well as on the estimate of E(X) (which is of interest to us). The results are highlighted in Table 5.10a (AS vs JC) and Table 5.10b (BCJ vs BJC). For the AS vs JC simulation runs, the parameters vectors are a=(+0.5,+1.0),, m=10, while a=(+0.5,+1.0), ,, m=10 are the corresponding values of parameters for BCJ vs BJC sampling procedure