Advertisement

Metrika

pp 1–19 | Cite as

The main effect confounding pattern for saturated orthogonal designs

  • Yuxuan LinEmail author
  • Kai-Tai Fang
Article
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a criterion “the main effect confounding pattern (MECP)” for comparing projection designs based on saturated symmetric orthogonal designs. Some studies for \(L_9(3^4)\), \(L_{27}(3^{13})\) and \(L_{16}(4^5)\) are given. They show that the new criterion MECP is mostly consistent with the criteria: the generalized word-length pattern and the discrepancies CD and MD. Moreover, the MECP can provide more information about statistical performance in the classification for projection designs than the other criteria. Hence, designs with the best projection MECP may perform better in the view of confounding. The MECP provides a way to find the best main effect arrangement for the experimenter. We also prove that all the geometrically equivalent \(L_n(f^s)\) designs have the same WD/CD/MD discrepancy values.

Keywords

Main effect confounding pattern Orthogonal design Generalized word-length pattern Centered \(L_2\)-discrepancy Mixture discrepancy Isomorphism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the UIC Grants (R201712, R201810 and R201912) and the Zhuhai Premier Discipline Grant. The authors thank Dr. A. M. Elsawah and two reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.

References

  1. Box GEP, Hunter WG, Hunter JS (1978) Statistics for experimenters. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Cheng SW, Ye K (2004) Geometric isomorphism and minimum aberration for factorial designs with quantitative factors. Ann. Stat. 32:2168–2185MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark JB, Dean AM (2001) Equivalence of fractional factorial designs. Stat. Sin. 11:537–547MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Elsawah AM, Fang KT, Ke X (2019) New recommended designs for screening either qualitative or quantitative factors. Stat Pap.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-019-01089-9 Google Scholar
  5. Fang KT, Ma CX (2000) The uniformity—a useful criterion in experimental design. In: First midwest conference for new directions in experimental design, May 2000, Columbus, OHGoogle Scholar
  6. Fang KT, Ma CX (2001) Orthogonal and uniform experimental designs. Science Press, Henderson, pp 175–183 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  7. Fang KT, Mukerjee R (2000) Connection between uniformity and aberration in regular fractions of two-level factorials. Biometrika 87:173–198MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Fang KT, Zhang A (2004) Minimum aberration majorization in non-isomorphic saturated designs. J Stat Plan Inference 126:337–346MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Fang KT, Quan H, Chen QY (1988) Practical regression analysis. Science Press, Henderson, pp 348–349 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  10. Fang KT, Tang Y, Yin JX (2008) Lower bounds of various criteria in experimental designs. J Stat Plan Inference 138:184–195MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Fries A, Hunter WG (1980) Minimum aberration \(2^{k-p}\) designs. Technometrics 8:601–608zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Hickernell FJ (1998) A generalized discrepency and quadrature error bound. Math Comput 67:299–322CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Lam C, Tonchev VD (1996) Classification of affine resolvable \(2-(27, 9, 4)\) designs. J Stat Plan Inference 56:187–202MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Li W, Zhou Q, Zhang RC (2015) Effective designs based on individual word length patterns. J Stat Plan Inference 163:43–47MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Ma CX, Fang KT (2001) A note on generalized aberration in fractional designs. Metrika 53:85–93MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Ma CX, Fang KT, Lin DKJ (2001) On isomorphism of factorial designs. J Complex 17:86–97MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Tang Y, Xu HQ (2014) Permuting regular fractional factorial designs for screening quantitative factors. Biometrika 101(2):333–350MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Tang Y, Xu HQ, Lin DKJ (2012) Uniform fractional factorial designs. Ann Stat 40(2):891–907MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Wang Y, Fang KT (1981) A note on uniform distribution and experimental design. Chin Sci Bull 26:485–489MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Xu H, Wu CFJ (2001) Generalized minimum aberration for asymmetrical fractional factorial designs. Ann Stat 29:549–560MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhang RC, Li P, Zhao SL, Ai MY (2008) A general minimum lower-order confounding criterion for two-level regular designs. Stat Sin 18:1689–1705MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhou YD, Fang KT, Ning JH (2013) Mixture discrepancy for quasi-random point sets. J Complex 29:283–301MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Science and TechnologyBNU-HKBU United International CollegeZhuhaiChina
  2. 2.The Key Lab of Random Complex Structures and Data AnalysisThe Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations