1 / 19

Stat 470-14

Stat 470-14. Today: Finish Chapter 3; Start Chapter 4 Assignment 3 : 3.14 a, b (do normal qq-plots only),c, 3.16, 3.17 Additional questions : 3.14 b (also use the IER version of Lenth’s method and compare to the qq-plot conclusions), 3.19 Important Sections in Chapter 3 :

annice
Download Presentation

Stat 470-14

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Stat 470-14 • Today: Finish Chapter 3; Start Chapter 4 • Assignment 3: 3.14 a, b (do normal qq-plots only),c, 3.16, 3.17 • Additional questions: 3.14 b (also use the IER version of Lenth’s method and compare to the qq-plot conclusions), 3.19 • Important Sections in Chapter 3: • 3.1-3.7 (Read these) • 3.8 (don’t bother reading), • 3.11-3.13 (Read these)

  2. Blocking in 2k Experiments • The factorial experiment is an example of a completely randomized design • Often wish to block such experiments • As an example, you may wish to use the same paper helicopter for more than one trial • But which treatments should appear together in a block?

  3. Blocking in 2k Experiments • Consider a 23 factorial experiment in 2 blocks

  4. Blocking in 2k Experiments • Presumably, blocks are important. • Effect hierarchy suggest we sacrifice higher order interactions • Which is better: • b=ABC • b=AB • Can write as:

  5. Blocking in 2k Experiments • Suppose wish to run the experiment in 4 blocks • b1=AB and b2=BC • These imply a third relation • Group is called the defining contrast sub-group

  6. Blocking in 2k Experiments • Identifies which effects are confounded with blocks • Cannot tell difference between these effects and the blocking effects

  7. Suppose wish to run the 23 experiment in 4 blocks b1=AB and b2=BC I=ABb1=BCb2=ACb1b2 Suppose wish to run the 23 experiment in 4 blocks b1=ABC and b2=BC I=ABCb1=BCb2=Ab1b2 Which design is better?

  8. Ranking the Designs • Let D denote a blocking design • gi(D) is the number of i-factor interactions confounded in blocks (i=1,2,…k) • For any 2 blocking schemes (D1 and D2) , let r be the smallest i such that

  9. Ranking the Designs • Effect hierarchy suggests that the design that confounds the fewest lower order terms is best • So, if then D1 has less aberration • A design has minimum aberration (MA) if no design has less aberration

  10. Fractional Factorial Designs at 2-Levels • 2k factorial experiments can be very useful in exploring a relatively large number of factors in relatively few trials • When k is large, the number of trials is large • Suppose have enough resources to run only a fraction of the 2k unique treatments • Which sub-set of the 2k treatments should one choose?

  11. Example • Suppose have 5 factors, each at 2-levels, but only enough resources to run 16 trials • Can use a 16-run full factorial to design the experiment • Use the 16 unique treatments for 4 factors to set the levels of the first 4 factors (A-D) • Use an interaction column from the first 4 factors to set the levels of the 5th factor

  12. Example

  13. Fractional Factorial Designs at 2-Levels • Use a 2k-p fractional factorial design to explore k factors in 2k-p trials • In general, can construct a 2k-p fractional factorial design from the full factorial design with 2k-p trials • Set the levels of the first (k-p) factors similar to the full factorial design with 2k-p trials • Next, use the interaction columns between the first (k-p) factors to set levels of the remaining factors

  14. Example • Suppose have 7 factors, each at 2-levels, but only enough resources to run 16 trials • Can use a 16-run full factorial to design the experiment • Use the 16 unique treatments for 4 factors to set the levels of the first 4 factors (A-D) • Use interaction columns from the first 4 factors to set the levels of the remaining 3 factors

  15. Example • The 3 relations imply other relations • Words • Defining contrast sub-group • Word-length pattern

  16. Example • Would like to have as few short words as possible • Why?

  17. How can we compare designs? • Resolution

  18. Minimum aberration:

  19. Example • Suppose have 7 factors, each at 2-levels, but only enough resources to run 32 trials • Can use a 27-2 fractional factorial design • Which one is better? • D1: I=ABCDF=ABCEG=DEFG • D2: I=ABCF=ADEG=BCDEG

More Related