Archive




Volume 6, Issue 4, July 2017, Page: 205-208
Modified Exact Single-Value Criteria for Partial Replications of the Central Composite Design
Eugene C. Ukaegbu, Department of Statistics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria
Polycarp E. Chigbu, Department of Statistics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria
Received: Oct. 18, 2016;       Accepted: Feb. 3, 2017;       Published: Jul. 10, 2017
DOI: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20170604.16      View  1924      Downloads  76
Abstract
Replication of the factorial (cube) and/or axial (star) portions of the central composite design (CCD in response surface exploration has gained great attention recently. Some well known metrics (called single-value functions or criteria) and graphical methods are utilized in evaluating the regression based response surface design. The single-value functions considered here are the A-efficiency, and the D-efficiency, , where , k is number of factors,  is the kth design measure, is the design’s information matrix,  is its inverse and N is the total number of experimental runs. These two functions are very popular in parameter estimation in response surface methodology. The exact measures of these two design criteria will be developed analytically in this work to account for partial replication of the cube and/or star components of the CCD. This will alleviate the burden of manual computation of these metrics when there are partial replications and reduce over reliance on software values which, often, are approximate values and maybe inaccurate.
Keywords
Design Efficiency, Determinant, Information Matrix, Partial Replication, Response Surface Methodology, Trace
To cite this article
Eugene C. Ukaegbu, Polycarp E. Chigbu, Modified Exact Single-Value Criteria for Partial Replications of the Central Composite Design, American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics. Vol. 6, No. 4, 2017, pp. 205-208. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20170604.16
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
Li, J., Liang, L., Borror, C. M., Anderson-Cook, C. M. and Montgomery, D. C. (2009). Graphical Summaries to Compare Prediction Variance Performance for Variations of the Central Composite Design for 6 to 10 Factors, Quality Technology and Quantitative Management, Vol. 6 (4), 433 – 449.
[2]
Box, G. E. P and Wilson, K. B. (1951), On the Experimental Attainment of Optimum Conditions, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, Vol. 13, 1 – 45.
[3]
Chigbu, P. E. and Ukaegbu, E. C. (2017), Recent Developments on Partial Replications of Response Surface Central Composite Designs: A Review, Journal of Statistical Application and Probability, Vol. 6 (1), 1 – 14.
[4]
Ukaegbu, E. C. and Chigbu, P. E. (2015), Graphical Evaluation of the Prediction Capabilities of Partially Replicated Orthogonal Central Composite Designs, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 31, 707 – 717.
[5]
Kao, J.M-H. and Stufken, J. (2015), Optimal Design for Event-Related fMRI Studies: in Handbook of Design and Analysis of Experiments (Dean, Morris, Stufkten and Bingham) as Editors, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, London and New York.
[6]
Ukaegbu, E. C. and Chigbu, P. E. (2017). Evaluation of Orthogonally Blocked Central Composite Designs with Partial Replications, Sankhya B, Vol. 79(1), 112-141. DOI: 10.1007/s13571-016-0120-z.
[7]
Borkowski, J. J. (2003), A Comparison of Prediction Variance Criteria for Response Surface Designs, Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 35 (1), 70–77.
[8]
Borkowski, J. J and Valeroso, E. S. (2001), Comparison of Design Optimality Criteria of Reduced Models for Response Surface Designs in the Hypercube, Technometrics, Vol. 43 (4), pp. 468–477.
[9]
Ukaegbu, E. C. and Chigbu, P. E. (2015). Characterization of Prediction Variance Properties of Rotatable Central Composite Designs for 3 to 10 Factors, International Journal of Computational and Theoretical Statistics, Vol. 2 (2), pp. 87–97.
[10]
Wong, W. K. (1994), Comparing Robust Properties of A, D, E and G-optimal Designs, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, Vol. 18, pp. 441-448.
[11]
Searle, S. R. (1982), Matrix Algebra Useful for Statistics, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
[12]
Atkinson, A.C. and Donev, A.N. (1992), Optimum Experimental Designs, Oxford University Press, New York.
Browse journals by subject