Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5351/KJAS.2010.23.2.285

Animated Quantile Plots for Evaluating Response Surface Designs  

Jang, Dae-Heung (Department of Statistics, Pukyong National University)
Publication Information
The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics / v.23, no.2, 2010 , pp. 285-293 More about this Journal
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;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 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.   DOI
3 Lee, J. and Khuri, A. I. (1999). Graphical technique for comparing designs for random models, Journal of Applied Statistics, 26, 933-947.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Mukhopadhyay, S. and Khuri, A. I. (2008). Comparison of designs for multivariate generalized linear models, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 138, 169-183.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Myers, R. H. and Montgomery, D. C. (2002). Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization using Designed Experiments, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York.
7 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 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.
10 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Giovannitti-Jensen, A. and Myers, R. H. (1989). Graphical assessment of the prediction capability of response surface designs, Technometrics, 31, 159-171.   DOI
12 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Khuri, A. I. (1997). Quantile dispersion graphs for analysis of variance estimates of variance components, Journal of Applied Statistics, 24, 711-722.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 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.   DOI   ScienceOn