IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/stapro/v81y2011i1p116-120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the D-optimality of orthogonal and nonorthogonal blocked main effects plans

Author

Listed:
  • Jacroux, Mike

Abstract

In this paper, we consider experimental situations where a main effects plan is to be used to study m two-level factors using n runs which are partitioned into b blocks of equal size k=n/b. For the case and k>2 where k is even, sufficient conditions are derived for certain designs having all main effects orthogonal to blocks to be D-optimal among all available designs. For we also give conditions under which one type of design not having all main effects orthogonal to blocks is D-optimal among all available designs.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacroux, Mike, 2011. "On the D-optimality of orthogonal and nonorthogonal blocked main effects plans," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 116-120, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:81:y:2011:i:1:p:116-120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-7152(10)00276-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jacroux, Mike & Kealy-Dichone, Bonni, 2015. "On the type I optimality of blocked 2-level main effects plans having blocks of different sizes," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 39-43.
    2. Dutta, Ganesh & SahaRay, Rita, 2015. "D- and E-optimal blocked main effects plans with unequal block sizes when n is odd," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 37-43.
    3. Jacroux, Mike & Kealy-Dichone, Bonni, 2015. "On the use of blocked 2-level main effects plans having blocks of different sizes," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 362-368.

    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:stapro:v:81:y:2011:i:1:p:116-120. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description .

    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.