zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Evaluation of orthogonally blocked central composite designs with partial replications. (English) Zbl 1402.62184
Summary: In this work, the orthogonal blocking of the central composite designs is evaluated by considering various equal and unequal replications of the centre point in the factorial (cube) and axial (star) blocks. The A-, D- and G-efficiencies as well as the V-criterion are the single-value design criteria used to examine the prediction performances of the designs. The fraction of design space plot is the graphical method used to display the prediction variance characteristics of these designs throughout the entire design space. The cube and star portions are also replicated to enhance the performance of the designs. The results show that higher and equal replication of the centre points in the blocks as well as more centre points in the star blocks than the cube blocks improve the prediction capabilities of the orthogonally blocked CCD in spherical region.
62K20 Response surface designs
62K05 Optimal statistical designs
Full Text: DOI
[1] Anderson-Cook, CM; Borror, CM; Montgomery, DC, Response surface design evaluation and comparison, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 139, 629-641, (2009) · Zbl 1149.62063
[2] Borkowski, JJ, Spherical prediction properties of central composite and box behnken designs, Technometrics, 37, 399-410, (1995) · Zbl 0899.62094
[3] Borkowski, JJ; Valeroso, ES, Comparison of design optimality criteria of reduced models for response surface designs in the hypercube, Technometrics, 43, 468-477, (2001)
[4] Box, G.E.P and Draper, N.R. (2007). Response Surfaces, Mixtures and Ridge Analyses. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken. · Zbl 1267.62006
[5] Box, GEP; Wilson, KB, On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 13, 1-45, (1951) · Zbl 0043.34402
[6] Draper, NR, Center points in second-order response surface designs, Technometrics, 24, 127-133, (1982) · Zbl 0485.62075
[7] Dykstra, OJr, Partial duplication of response surface designs, Technometrics, 2, 185-195, (1960) · Zbl 0201.52505
[8] Goos, P, Discussion of response surface design evaluation and comparison, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 139, 657-659, (2009) · Zbl 1375.62016
[9] Goos, P; Donev, AN, Blocking response surface designs, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 51, 1075-1088, (2006) · Zbl 1157.62471
[10] Kuhri, A.I. and Cornell, J.A. (1996). Response Surfaces: Designs and Analysis, 2nd Ed. CRC Press, N.Y.
[11] Montgomery, D.C. (2013). Design and analysis of Experiments, 8th Ed. John Wiley and Sons Inc., N.Y.
[12] Myers, R.H., Montgomery, D.C. and Anderson-Cook, C.M. (2009). Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, 3rd Edition. Wiley and Sons Inc, New York. · Zbl 1269.62066
[13] Piepel, GF, Discussion of “response surface design evaluation and comparison”? by C.M. Anderson-cook, C.M. borror and D.C. Montgomery, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 139, 653-656, (2009) · Zbl 1375.62019
[14] Trinca, LA; Gilmour, SG, Variance dispersion graphs for comparing blocked response designs, Journal of Quality Technology, 30, 349-364, (1998)
[15] Wong, WK, Comparing robust properties of A, D, E and G-optimal designs, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 18, 441-448, (1994) · Zbl 0825.62646
[16] Zahran, A; Anderson-Cook, CM; Myers, RH, Fraction of design space to access prediction capability of response surface designs, Journal of Quality Technology, 35, 377-386, (2003)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.