JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Animated Quantile Plots for Evaluating Response Surface Designs
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Animated Quantile Plots for Evaluating Response Surface Designs
Jang, Dae-Heung;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The traditional methods for evaluating response surface designs are alphabetic optimality criteria. These single-number criteria such as D-, A-, G- and V-optimality do not completely reflect the prediction variance characteristics of the design in question. Alternatives to single-numbers summaries include graphical displays of the prediction variance across the design regions. We can suggest the animated quantile plots as the animation of the quantile plots and use these animated quantile plots for comparing and evaluating response surface designs.
 Keywords
Response surface designs;alphabetic optimality;animated quantile plots;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
1.
실험계획의 시각화,장대흥;

응용통계연구, 2011. vol.24. 5, pp.893-904 crossref(new window)
1.
Visualization for Experimental Designs, Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 2011, 24, 5, 893  crossref(new windwow)
 References
1.
Anderson-Cook, C. M., Borror, C. M. and Montgomery, D. C. (2009). Response surface design evaluation and comparison, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 139, 629-641. crossref(new window)

2.
Giovannitti-Jensen, A. and Myers, R. H. (1989). Graphical assessment of the prediction capability of response surface designs, Technometrics, 31, 159-171. crossref(new window)

3.
Jang, D. and Park, S. (1993). A measure and a graphical method for evaluating slope rotatability in response surface designs, Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 22, 1849-1863. crossref(new window)

4.
Khuri, A. I. (1997). Quantile dispersion graphs for analysis of variance estimates of variance components, Journal of Applied Statistics, 24, 711-722. crossref(new window)

5.
Khuri, A. I., Kim, H. J. and Um, Y. (1996). Quantile plots of the prediction variance for response surface designs, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 22, 395-407. crossref(new window)

6.
Khuri, A. I. and Lee, J. (1998). A graphical approach for evaluating and comparing designs for nonlinear models, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 27, 433-443. crossref(new window)

7.
Kim, H., Um, Y. and Khuri, A. I. (1996). Quantile plots of the average slope variance for response surface designs, Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 25, 995-1014. crossref(new window)

8.
Lee, J. and Khuri, A. I. (1999). Graphical technique for comparing designs for random models, Journal of Applied Statistics, 26, 933-947. crossref(new window)

9.
Lee, J. and Khuri, A. I. (2000). Quantile dispersion graphs for the comparison of designs for a random two-way model, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 91, 123-137. crossref(new window)

10.
Mukhopadhyay, S. and Khuri, A. I. (2008). Comparison of designs for multivariate generalized linear models, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 138, 169-183. crossref(new window)

11.
Myers, R. H. and Montgomery, D. C. (2002). Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization using Designed Experiments, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York.

12.
Ozol-Godfrey, A., Anderson-Cook, C. M. and Robinson, T. J. (2007). Fraction of design space plots for generalized linear models, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 138, 203-219. crossref(new window)

13.
Robinson, K. S. and Khuri, A. I. (2003). Quantile dispersion graphs for evaluating and comparing designs for logistic regression models, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 43, 47-62. crossref(new window)

14.
Zahran, A., Anderson-Cook, C. M. and Myers, R. H. (2003). Fraction of design space to assess the prediction capability of response surface designs, Journal of Quality Technology, 35, 377-386.