IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v194y2024ics0167947324000240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factor selection in screening experiments by aggregation over random models

Author

Listed:
  • Singh, Rakhi
  • Stufken, John

Abstract

Screening experiments are useful for identifying a small number of truly important factors from a large number of potentially important factors. The Gauss-Dantzig Selector (GDS) is often the preferred analysis method for screening experiments. Just considering main-effects models can result in erroneous conclusions, but including interaction terms, even if restricted to two-factor interactions, increases the number of model terms dramatically and challenges the GDS analysis. A new analysis method, called Gauss-Dantzig Selector Aggregation over Random Models (GDS-ARM), which performs a GDS analysis on multiple models that include only some randomly selected interactions, is proposed. Results from these different analyses are then aggregated to identify the important factors. The proposed method is discussed, the appropriate choices for the tuning parameters are suggested, and the performance of the method is studied on real and simulated data.

Suggested Citation

  • Singh, Rakhi & Stufken, John, 2024. "Factor selection in screening experiments by aggregation over random models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:194:y:2024:i:c:s0167947324000240
    DOI: 10.1016/j.csda.2024.107940
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167947324000240
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.csda.2024.107940?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bradley Jones & Dibyen Majumdar, 2014. "Optimal Supersaturated Designs," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 109(508), pages 1592-1600, December.
    2. Eric D. Schoen & Nha Vo-Thanh & Peter Goos, 2017. "Two-Level Orthogonal Screening Designs With 24, 28, 32, and 36 Runs," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(519), pages 1354-1369, July.
    3. Fan J. & Li R., 2001. "Variable Selection via Nonconcave Penalized Likelihood and its Oracle Properties," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 96, pages 1348-1360, December.
    4. Marley, Christopher J. & Woods, David C., 2010. "A comparison of design and model selection methods for supersaturated experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(12), pages 3158-3167, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. VÁZQUEZ-ALCOCER, Alan & SCHOEN, Eric D. & GOOS, Peter, 2018. "A mixed integer optimization approach for model selection in screening experiments," Working Papers 2018007, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    2. Das, Ujjwal & Gupta, Sudhir & Gupta, Shuva, 2014. "Screening active factors in supersaturated designs," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 223-232.
    3. Tutz, Gerhard & Pößnecker, Wolfgang & Uhlmann, Lorenz, 2015. "Variable selection in general multinomial logit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 207-222.
    4. Xu, Yang & Zhao, Shishun & Hu, Tao & Sun, Jianguo, 2021. "Variable selection for generalized odds rate mixture cure models with interval-censored failure time data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    5. Emmanouil Androulakis & Christos Koukouvinos & Kalliopi Mylona & Filia Vonta, 2010. "A real survival analysis application via variable selection methods for Cox's proportional hazards model," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(8), pages 1399-1406.
    6. Koki Momoki & Takuma Yoshida, 2024. "Hypothesis testing for varying coefficient models in tail index regression," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 65(6), pages 3821-3852, August.
    7. Lili Pan & Ziyan Luo & Naihua Xiu, 2017. "Restricted Robinson Constraint Qualification and Optimality for Cardinality-Constrained Cone Programming," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 104-118, October.
    8. Gerhard Tutz & Moritz Berger, 2018. "Tree-structured modelling of categorical predictors in generalized additive regression," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 12(3), pages 737-758, September.
    9. Chenchuan (Mark) Li & Ulrich K. Müller, 2021. "Linear regression with many controls of limited explanatory power," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), pages 405-442, May.
    10. Shuichi Kawano, 2014. "Selection of tuning parameters in bridge regression models via Bayesian information criterion," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1207-1223, November.
    11. Hang Yu & Yuanjia Wang & Donglin Zeng, 2023. "A general framework of nonparametric feature selection in high‐dimensional data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 951-963, June.
    12. Qianyun Li & Runmin Shi & Faming Liang, 2019. "Drug sensitivity prediction with high-dimensional mixture regression," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, February.
    13. Shuang Zhang & Xingdong Feng, 2022. "Distributed identification of heterogeneous treatment effects," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 57-89, March.
    14. Jun Zhu & Hsin‐Cheng Huang & Perla E. Reyes, 2010. "On selection of spatial linear models for lattice data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 72(3), pages 389-402, June.
    15. Zak-Szatkowska, Malgorzata & Bogdan, Malgorzata, 2011. "Modified versions of the Bayesian Information Criterion for sparse Generalized Linear Models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(11), pages 2908-2924, November.
    16. Lam, Clifford, 2008. "Estimation of large precision matrices through block penalization," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 31543, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Soave, David & Lawless, Jerald F., 2023. "Regularized regression for two phase failure time studies," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    18. Ping Wu & Xinchao Luo & Peirong Xu & Lixing Zhu, 2017. "New variable selection for linear mixed-effects models," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 69(3), pages 627-646, June.
    19. Jianqing Fan & Xu Han, 2017. "Estimation of the false discovery proportion with unknown dependence," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 79(4), pages 1143-1164, September.
    20. Zhu Wang, 2022. "MM for penalized estimation," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 31(1), pages 54-75, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:194:y:2024:i:c:s0167947324000240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.