IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uiiexx/v45y2013i11p1153-1165.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three-level equivalent-estimation split-plot designs based on subset and supplementary difference set designs

Author

Listed:
  • Kalliopi Mylona
  • Harrison Macharia
  • Peter Goos

Abstract

In many industrial experiments, complete randomization of the runs is impossible as, often, they involve factors whose levels are hard or costly to change. In such cases, the split-plot design is a cost-efficient alternative that reduces the number of independent settings of the hard-to-change factors. In general, the use of generalized least squares is required for model estimation based on data from split-plot designs. However, the ordinary least squares estimator is equivalent to the generalized least squares estimator for some split-plot designs, including some second-order split-plot response surface designs. These designs are called equivalent-estimation designs. An important consequence of the equivalence is that basic experimental design software can be used for model estimation. This article introduces two new families of equivalent-estimation split-plot designs, one based on subset designs and another based on supplementary difference set designs. The resulting designs complement existing catalogs of equivalent-estimation designs and allow for a more flexible choice of the number of hard-to-change factors, the number of easy-to-change factors, the number and size of whole plots, and the total sample size. It is shown that many of the newly proposed designs possess good predictive properties when compared to D-optimal split-plot designs.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalliopi Mylona & Harrison Macharia & Peter Goos, 2013. "Three-level equivalent-estimation split-plot designs based on subset and supplementary difference set designs," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(11), pages 1153-1165.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:uiiexx:v:45:y:2013:i:11:p:1153-1165
    DOI: 10.1080/0740817X.2012.723841
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0740817X.2012.723841
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0740817X.2012.723841?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bradley Jones & Peter Goos, 2007. "A candidate‐set‐free algorithm for generating D‐optimal split‐plot designs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 56(3), pages 347-364, May.
    2. MACHARIA, Harrison & GOOS, Peter, 2010. "D-optimal and D-efficient equivalent-estimation second-order split-plot designs," Working Papers 2010011, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    3. Steven G. Gilmour, 2006. "Response Surface Designs for Experiments in Bioprocessing," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 323-331, June.
    4. Peter Goos, 2006. "Optimal versus orthogonal and equivalent‐estimation design of blocked and split‐plot experiments," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 60(3), pages 361-378, August.
    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. Sambo, Francesco & Borrotti, Matteo & Mylona, Kalliopi, 2014. "A coordinate-exchange two-phase local search algorithm for the D- and I-optimal designs of split-plot experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1193-1207.
    2. JONES, Bradley & GOOS, Peter, 2012. "I-optimal versus D-optimal split-plot response surface designs," Working Papers 2012002, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    3. Smucker, Byran J. & Castillo, Enrique del & Rosenberger, James L., 2012. "Model-robust designs for split-plot experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(12), pages 4111-4121.
    4. ARNOUTS, Heidi & GOOS, Peter, 2013. "Staggered-level designs for response surface modeling," Working Papers 2013027, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    5. Palhazi Cuervo, Daniel & Goos, Peter & Sörensen, Kenneth, 2017. "An algorithmic framework for generating optimal two-stratum experimental designs," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 224-249.
    6. Xiaodong Li & Xu He & Yuanzhen He & Hui Zhang & Zhong Zhang & Dennis K. J. Lin, 2017. "The Design and Analysis for the Icing Wind Tunnel Experiment of a New Deicing Coating," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(520), pages 1417-1429, October.
    7. Arnouts, Heidi & Goos, Peter, 2010. "Update formulas for split-plot and block designs," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(12), pages 3381-3391, December.
    8. da Silva, Marcelo A. & Gilmour, Steven G. & Trinca, Luzia A., 2017. "Factorial and response surface designs robust to missing observations," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 261-272.
    9. ARNOUTS, Heidi & GOOS, Peter, 2009. "Design and analysis of industrial strip-plot experiments," Working Papers 2009007, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    10. Gautam, Ashish & Mondal, Monoj Kumar, 2024. "Post-combustion CO2 absorption-desorption performance of novel aqueous binary amine blend of Hexamethylenediamine (HMDA) and 2-Dimethylaminoethanol (DMAE)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    11. Kessels, Roselinde & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2008. "Optimal designs for conjoint experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 2369-2387, January.
    12. Bradley Jones & Peter Goos, 2009. "D-optimal design of split-split-plot experiments," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 96(1), pages 67-82.
    13. Moein Saleh & Ming-Hung Kao & Rong Pan, 2017. "Design D-optimal event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging experiments," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 66(1), pages 73-91, January.
    14. Georgiou, Stelios D. & Stylianou, Stella & Aggarwal, Manohar, 2014. "A class of composite designs for response surface methodology," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1124-1133.
    15. Borrotti, Matteo & Sambo, Francesco & Mylona, Kalliopi, 2023. "Multi-objective optimisation of split-plot designs," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 163-172.
    16. Smucker, Byran J. & Jensen, Willis & Wu, Zichen & Wang, Bo, 2017. "Robustness of classical and optimal designs to missing observations," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 251-260.
    17. SCHOEN, Eric D. & JONES, Bradley & GOOS, Peter, 2010. "Split-plot experiments with factor-dependent whole-plot sizes," Working Papers 2010001, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    18. Großmann, Heiko & Gilmour, Steven G., 2023. "Partially orthogonal blocked three-level response surface designs," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 138-154.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:uiiexx:v:45:y:2013:i:11:p:1153-1165. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uiie .

    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.