SMHS DesignOfExperiments - Revision history

Glenbrau: /* Problems */

2015-04-01T16:06:00Z

‎Problems

Glenbrau: /* Applications */

2015-04-01T14:47:27Z

‎Applications

Glenbrau: /* Applications */

2015-03-31T20:50:38Z

‎Applications

Glenbrau: /* DOE process */

2015-03-31T18:55:44Z

‎DOE process

Glenbrau: /* DOE guidelines */

2015-03-31T18:49:58Z

‎DOE guidelines

Glenbrau: /* Objectives of DOE */

2015-03-31T13:50:59Z

‎Objectives of DOE

Glenbrau: /* Components of DOE */

2015-03-31T13:42:25Z

‎Components of DOE

Glenbrau: /* Theory */

2015-03-31T13:32:37Z

‎Theory

Glenbrau: /* Motivation */

2015-03-31T13:18:15Z

‎Motivation

Glenbrau: /* Overview */

2015-03-31T13:12:54Z

‎Overview

@@ Line 161: / Line 161: @@
 ===Problems===
-Suppose two researchers wanted to determine if aspirin reduced the chance of a heart attack. Researcher 1 studied the medical records of 500 patients. For each patient, he recorded whether the person took aspirin every day and if the person had ever had a heart attack. Then he reported the percentage of heart attacks for the patients who took aspirin every day and for those who did not take aspirin every day.
+Suppose two researchers want to determine if aspirin reduces the chance of a heart attack. Researcher 1 studied the medical records of 500 patients, and she recorded whether each patient took aspirin every day and if the person had ever had a heart attack. Then she reported the percentage of heart attacks for the patients who took aspirin every day and for those who did not take aspirin every day.
-Researcher 2 also studied 500 people. He randomly assigned half of the patients to take aspirin every day and the other half to take a placebo everyday. After a certain length of time, he reported the percentage of heart attacks for the patients who took aspirin every day and for those who did not take aspirin every day. Suppose that both researchers found that there is a statistically significant difference in the heart attack rates for the aspirin users and the non-aspirin users and that aspirin users had a lower rate of heart attacks. Can both researchers conclude that aspirin caused the reduction?
 :(a) No, only researcher 2 can conclude this.
 :(b) No, only researcher 1 can conclude this.
@@ Line 168: / Line 172: @@
 :(d) Yes, because aspirin users had a larger heart attack rate in both studies.
 :(a) Completely randomized design with two factors.
 :(b) Completely randomized design with two factors and single blind.
@@ Line 175: / Line 179: @@
 :(d) Completely randomized design with two factors and double blind.
-The next four questions are based on the following:
+Hospital floors are usually covered by bare tiles. Carpets would cut down on noise but might be more likely to harbor germs. To study this possibility, investigators randomly assigned 8 of 16 available hospital rooms to have carpets installed, while the others were left bare. Later, air from each room was pumped over a dish of agar. The dish was incubated for a fixed period, and the number of bacteria colonies was counted.
-*1.Select the appropriate statistical term for the 8 rooms left bare.
+*1. Select the appropriate statistical term for the 8 rooms left bare.
 *:(a) Treatments
 *:(b) Experimental Units
@@ Line 185: / Line 189: @@
 *:(d) Response
-*2.Select the appropriate statistical term for the 16 hospital rooms.
+*2. Select the appropriate statistical term for the 16 hospital rooms.
 *:(a) Response
 *:(b) Treatments
@@ Line 191: / Line 195: @@
 *:(d) Control Group
-*3.Select the appropriate statistical term for number of colonies in a dish.
+*3. Select the appropriate statistical term for number of colonies in a dish.
 *:(a) Treatments
 *:(b) Control Group
@@ Line 197: / Line 201: @@
 *:(d) Experimental Units
-*4.Select the appropriate statistical term for number of colonies in a dish.
+*4. Select the appropriate statistical term for number of colonies in a dish.
 *:(a) Treatments
 *:(b) Response
@@ Line 203: / Line 207: @@
 *:(d) Control Group
 :(a) A blind study
 :(b) An experiment with a design flaw
@@ Line 210: / Line 214: @@
 :(d) A well-designed experiment
 :(a) Student A is doing descriptive statistics and student B is doing inferential statistics.
 :(b) Student A is doing inferential statistics and student B is doing descriptive statistics.
@@ Line 217: / Line 221: @@
 :(d) Both students are doing inferential statistics.
 :(a) A double blind study
 :(b) A well-designed experiment
@@ Line 224: / Line 228: @@
 :(d) Not a randomized experiment
 :(a) We need more information to decide
 :(b) This is an experimental study
@@ Line 231: / Line 235: @@
 :(d) This is a combination of experimental and observational study
 :(a) randomized block design
 :(b) Completely randomized two factor experiment
@@ Line 238: / Line 242: @@
 :(d) Completely randomized experiment with matching
 :(a) Test the difference in means between two paired or dependent samples.
 :(b) Use a chi-squared test of association.
@@ Line 247: / Line 250: @@
 :(e) Test for a difference in more than two means (one way ANOVA).
 :(a) Stratified random sampling
 :(b) Simple random sampling

@@ Line 143: / Line 143: @@
 ===Applications===
-*[http://www.cancer.org/healthy/stayawayfromtobacco/index This article] presents an observational study of smoking effects on cancer. It presents various side effects of tobacco on human health and provides a guide to quit smoking. This article illustrated the who study in ten sections where each section is fully developed in a clearly stated form with questions and answers format. The whole article is well organized and prepares people with enough knowledge of the reason behind quitting smoking as well as suggestions and programs help people quit smoking. This is a typical observational study.
+*[http://www.cancer.org/healthy/stayawayfromtobacco/index This article] presents an observational study of smoking effects on cancer. It presents various side effects of tobacco on human health and provides a guide to quit smoking. This article illustrates the entire study in ten sections, with each section being fully developed in a clearly stated in a questions and answers format. The whole article is well organized and will prepare people with enough knowledge of the reason behind quitting smoking as well as suggestions and programs to help people achieve this goal. This is a typical observational study.
-*[http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/2.3153?journalCode=ja  This article] brought together an empirical drag prediction model plus design of experiment, response surface and data-fusion methods with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to provide a wing optimization system. The system presented allows high-quality designs to be found using a full three-dimensional CFD code without the expense of direct searches. The meta-models built are shown to be more accurate than the initial empirical model or than simple response surfaces based on the CFD data alone. Data fusion is achieved by building a response surface kriging of the differences between the two drag prediction tools, which are working at varying levels of fidelity. It then uses kriging with empirical tool to predict the drags coming from the CFD code, which is much quicker to use than direct searches of the CFD.
+*[http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/2.3153?journalCode=ja  This article] brought together an empirical drag prediction model plus design of experiment, response surface, and data-fusion methods with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to provide a wing optimization system. The system presented here allows high-quality designs to be found using a full three-dimensional CFD code without the expense of direct searches. The meta-models built are shown to be more accurate than either the initial empirical model or simple response surfaces based on the CFD data alone. Data fusion is achieved by building a response surface kriging of the differences between the two drag prediction tools, which are working at varying levels of fidelity. It then uses kriging with empirical tools to predict the drags coming from the CFD code, which is much quicker to use than direct searches of the CFD.
-*[http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01621459.1972.10481253#.U6HGyBZRXKw This article] illustrated certain numerical approximations for finding one and two stage bioassay designs, which produce small posterior variance using a one-parameter logistic distribution. It discussed the use of two prior distribution: one for design and the other for inference with graphs for designing experiments when the prior distribution are normal. These graphs illustrate the importance of using additional dose levels when the variance of the prior distribution is large.
+*[http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01621459.1972.10481253#.U6HGyBZRXKw This article] illustrated certain numerical approximations for finding one and two stage bioassay designs, which produce small posterior variance using a one-parameter logistic distribution. It discussed the use of two prior distribution: one for design and the other for inference with graphs in designing experiments when the prior distributions are normal. These graphs illustrate the importance of using additional dose levels when the variance of the prior distribution is large.
 ===Software===

@@ Line 143: / Line 143: @@
 ===Applications===
-*[http://www.cancer.org/healthy/stayawayfromtobacco/index This article] presents an observational study of smoking effects on cancer. It presents various side effects of tobacco on human health and provided guide to quit smoking. This article illustrated the who study in ten sections where each section is fully developed in a clearly stated form with questions and answers format. The whole article is well organized and prepares people with enough knowledge of the reason behind quitting smoking as well as suggestions and programs help people quit smoking. This is a typical observational study.
+*[http://www.cancer.org/healthy/stayawayfromtobacco/index This article] presents an observational study of smoking effects on cancer. It presents various side effects of tobacco on human health and provides a guide to quit smoking. This article illustrated the who study in ten sections where each section is fully developed in a clearly stated form with questions and answers format. The whole article is well organized and prepares people with enough knowledge of the reason behind quitting smoking as well as suggestions and programs help people quit smoking. This is a typical observational study.
 *[http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/2.3153?journalCode=ja  This article] brought together an empirical drag prediction model plus design of experiment, response surface and data-fusion methods with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to provide a wing optimization system. The system presented allows high-quality designs to be found using a full three-dimensional CFD code without the expense of direct searches. The meta-models built are shown to be more accurate than the initial empirical model or than simple response surfaces based on the CFD data alone. Data fusion is achieved by building a response surface kriging of the differences between the two drag prediction tools, which are working at varying levels of fidelity. It then uses kriging with empirical tool to predict the drags coming from the CFD code, which is much quicker to use than direct searches of the CFD.
 *[http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01621459.1972.10481253#.U6HGyBZRXKw This article] illustrated certain numerical approximations for finding one and two stage bioassay designs, which produce small posterior variance using a one-parameter logistic distribution. It discussed the use of two prior distribution: one for design and the other for inference with graphs for designing experiments when the prior distribution are normal. These graphs illustrate the importance of using additional dose levels when the variance of the prior distribution is large.

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 '''Test of means – one factor experiment:'''
-One of the most common types of experiments is the comparison of two process methods, or two methods of treatment. One of the most straightforward methods to evaluate a new process method is to plot the results on an SPC chart that also includes historical data from the baseline process, with established control limits. Then apply the standard rules to evaluate out-of-control conditions to see if the process has been shifted. You may need to collect several subgroups worth of data in order to make a determination, although a single subgroup could fall outside of the existing control limits.
+One of the most common types of experiments is the comparison of two process methods, or of two methods of treatment. One of the most straightforward methods to evaluate a new process method is to plot the results on an [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_process_control SPC chart] that also includes historical data from the baseline process with established control limits. Then we apply the standard rules to evaluate out-of-control conditions to see if the process has been shifted. One may need to collect several subgroups worth of data in order to make a determination, although a single subgroup could fall outside of the existing control limits.
-An alternative way to control chart approach is to use F-test to compare the means of alternate treatments and this is done automatically with ANOVA (analysis of variance). Consider the following example where three treatments are analyzed with the following data:
+An alternative way to control chart approach is to use an [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-test F-test] to compare the means of alternate treatments. This is done automatically with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_of_variance ANOVA (analysis of variance)]. Consider the following example in which three treatments are analyzed with the following data:
 <center>

@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 ====DOE guidelines====
-*DOE guidelines address the questions outlined above by stipulating factors to be tested, levels of the factors and structure and layout of experimental conditions. To sum up, DOE aims to come up with an experiment that can obtain the required information in a cost effective and reproducible manner.
+*DOE guidelines address the questions outlined above by stipulating factors to be tested, as well as the levels of the factors and the structure and layout of the experimental conditions. To sum up, DOE aims to come up with an experiment that can obtain the required information in a cost effective and reproducible manner.
-*Unexplained variation, in addition to measurement error, can obscure the results. Errors can be unexplained variation that is either within or between experiment runs.
-*Noise factors: uncontrollable factors that induce variation under normal operating conditions. For example multiple shifts, humidity or raw materials can be built into the experiment so that variation doesn’t lumped into unexplained error.
+*Unexplained variation, in addition to measurement error, can obscure the results. Errors can be unexplained variations that occur either within or between experiment runs.
-*Correlation. Consider two factors that vary together may be highly correlated without one causing the other or they may both the cause of a third factor.
-*The combined effects or interactions. Consider growing rose, sufficient water will be benefit for its growth though too much water may be harmful for the rose. Factors may generate non-linear effects that are not additive, but these can only be studied with more complex experiments involving more than 2 level settings, such as quadratic or cubic.
+*Noise factors are uncontrollable factors that induce variation under normal operating conditions. For example, multiple shifts, humidity or raw materials can be built into the experiment so that variations will not be lumped together with unexplained errors.
 ====DOE process====

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 ====Objectives of DOE====
-*Comparing alternatives: DOE allows us to make an informed decision that evaluates both the quality and the cost.
+*Comparing alternatives (i.e., DOE allows us to make an informed decision that evaluates both the quality and the cost)
-*Identify significant factors that affect the output: separating the vital few from the trivial many.
+*Identifying significant factors that affect the output (i.e., separating the vital few from the trivial many)
-*Achieving an optimal process output.
+*Achieving an optimal process output
-*Reducing variability.
+*Reducing variability
-*Minimizing, maximizing or targeting an output.
+*Minimizing, maximizing or targeting an output
-*Improving process or product robustness to ensure the experiments fits with varying conditions.
+*Improving process or product robustness to ensure the experiments fits with varying conditions
-*Balance tradeoffs between multiple quality characteristics that require optimization.
+*Balance tradeoffs between multiple quality characteristics that require optimization
 ====DOE guidelines====

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 ====Components of DOE====
-*Factors (inputs): including controllable and uncontrollable variables. The former refers to the factors that we can control like how big is the dose or how often is the treatment taken by the patients. The later refers to factors we have no power with like the factors from the environment: air condition, temperature or humidity. People are generally considered as noise factor, which is an uncontrollable factor that causes variability under normal operating conditions but we can control it during the experiment using blocking and randomization.
+*''Factors'' (inputs): Include controllable and uncontrollable variables. The former refers to factors that we can control (e.g., the size of a dose or the frequency with which a treatment is taken by patients). The latter refers to factors we cannot control (e.g., environmental factors like air condition, temperature or humidity). Human beings are generally considered a ''noise factor'', which is an uncontrollable factor that causes variability under normal operating conditions; yet we can control these factors during the experiment using blocking and randomization.
-*Levels (settings of each factor): examples include particular level of dosage for evaluation.
-*Response (output): consider the test on a new drug. The output could be the frequency patients having the struck or their need for drugs. Experiments often desire to avoid optimizing the process for on response at the expense of another and important outcomes are measured and analyzed to determine the factors and their setting that will provide the best overall outcome.
+*''Levels'' (settings of each factor): One example would be the particular level of dosage for evaluation.
 ====Objectives of DOE====

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 ===Theory===
-[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_of_experiments '''The most common components in design of experiments(DOE): ''']
+[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_of_experiments '''The most common components in design of experiments (DOE): ''']
-*''Comparison'': in some fields of study it’s not possible to have independent measurements to a traceable standard and comparisons between treatments are much more valuable and preferable. To make inference about effects, associations or predictions, one typically has to compare different groups subjected to distinct conditions.
-*''Randomization'': the process of assigning individuals at random to groups in an experiment. It requires that we make allocation of (controlled variables) treatments to units using some random mechanism. Random does not mean haphazard and great care needs to be taken to make sure appropriate random methods are used.
+*''Comparison'': In some fields of study, it’s not possible to have independent measurements to a traceable standard, making comparisons between treatments much more valuable and preferable. To make inference about effects, associations or predictions, one typically has to compare different groups that are subjected to distinct conditions.
-*''Experimental vs. observational studies'': there are many situations where randomized experiments are impractical. Therefore, we cannot reduce causality or effects of various treatments on the response measurement. Observational studies are retrospective or prospective studies where the investigator doesn’t have control over randomization of treatments to subject or units. In these cases, the subjects or units fall naturally within a treatment group.
-*''Replication'': all measurements, observations or data collection are usually subject to variation and uncertainty. They are repeated and full experiments are replicated to help identify the sources of variation to better estimate the true effects of treatments, to further strengthen the experiment’s reliability and to add to the existing knowledge of the topic.
+*''Randomization'': The process of assigning individuals at random to groups in an experiment. It requires that we make allocation of (controlled variables) treatments to units using some random mechanism. Random does not mean haphazard and great care needs to be taken to ensure that appropriate random methods are used.
-*''Blocking'': the arrangement of experimental units into groups consisting of units that are similar to one another. It reduced known but irrelevant sources of variation between units and allows greater precision in the estimation of the source of variation under study.
-*''Orthogonality''： concerns the forms of contrasts that can be legitimately and efficiently carried out. With independence between contrasts, each orthogonal treatment provides different information to the others. The goal is to completely decompose the variance or the relations of the observed measurements into independent components.
+*''Experimental vs. observational studies'': There are many situations in which randomized experiments are impractical. Therefore, we cannot reduce causality or effects of various treatments on the response measurement. Observational studies are retrospective or prospective studies where the investigator doesn’t have control over the randomization of treatments to subject or units. In these cases, the subjects or units fall naturally within a treatment group.
-*''Factorial experiments'': are more efficient at evaluating the effects and possible interactions of several factors. DOE is built on the foundation of the analysis of variance, which partitions the observed variance into components according to what factors the experiment must estimate or test.
-*''Placebo'':  is a sham or simulated medical intervention that has no direct health impact but may result in actual improvement of a medical condition or disorder. Of such sham effect is observed, it is called a placebo effect. Common placebos are inert tablets, sham surgery and other procedures based on false information. An example could be giving a patient a pill identical to the actual treatment pill but without treatment ingredients. Typically all patients are informed that some will be treated using the drug and some will receive the insert pill, however the patients are blinded as to whether they actually received the drug or the placebo. Such an intervention may cause the patient to believe the treatment will change their condition, which may produce a subjective perception of a therapeutic effect.
+*''Replication'': All measurements, observations or data collection are usually subject to variation and uncertainty. They are repeated and full experiments are replicated to help identify the sources of variation. This helps to better estimate the true effects of treatments, to further strengthen the experiment’s reliability, and to add to the existing knowledge of the topic.
 ====Components of DOE====

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 === Motivation===
-Experiment would be the natural way to implement a study and achieve the desired objectives. So the next question is how can these experiments and studies be realized, that is we need a blueprint for planning the study or experiment including ways to collect data and to control study parameters for accuracy and consistency. What are the key factors in a process? At what settings would the process deliver acceptable performance? What are the main and interaction effects in the process and what settings would bring out less variation in the output?
+Experiment would be the natural way to implement a study and achieve the desired objectives. So the next question is how can these experiments and studies be realized? We need a blueprint for planning the study or experiment, including ways to collect data and to control study parameters for accuracy and consistency. What are the key factors in a process? At what settings would the process deliver acceptable performance? What are the main and interaction effects in the process, and what settings would bring out less variation in the output?
-Design of Experiment would be the answer to those questions. Experiments can be designed in many different ways to collect the information of which process inputs have a significant impact on the process output and what the target level of those inputs should be to achieve a desired output. There are [http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmd/section3/pmd31.htm four general problem areas] in which design of experiment may be applied:
-*Comparative: the designer is interested in assessing whether a change in a single factor has in fact resulted in a change/improvement to the process as a whole.
+Design of Experiment is the way to the answer these questions. Experiments can be designed in many different ways to collect information about which process inputs have a significant impact on the process output and what the target level of those inputs should be to achieve a desired output. There are [http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmd/section3/pmd31.htm four general problem areas] in which DOE may be applied:
-*Screening and characterizing: the designer is interested in understanding the process as a whole in the sense that they can have a ranked list of the importance of factors that can affect the process.
-*Modeling: the designer is interested in functionally modeling the process with the output being a good fit mathematical function, and to have good estimates of the coefficients in that function..
+*''Comparative'': The designer is interested in assessing whether a change in a single factor has in fact resulted in a change/improvement to the process as a whole.
-*Optimizing: the designer is interested in determining the optimal settings of the process factors, that is to determine for each factor the level of the factor that optimizes the process response.
 ===Theory===

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 ===Overview===
-Design of experiments is a systematic, rigorous approach to problem solving that applies principles and techniques at the data collection stage so as to ensure the generation of valid, supportable and defensible conclusions. Design of experiments can be used at the point of greatest leverage to reduce costs by speeding up the design process, reducing late engineering design changes and reducing product material and labor complexity. It is also powerful tools to achieve manufacturing costs savings by minimizing process variation and reducing rework, and the need for inspection. The lecture presents a general overview of DOE and an introduction to some fundamental concepts, objectives, steps and design guidelines to assist in conducting designed experiments.
+Design of experiments is a systematic, rigorous approach to problem solving that applies principles and techniques during the data collection stage so as to ensure the generation of valid, supportable and defensible conclusions. Design of experiments can be used at the point of greatest leverage to reduce costs by speeding up the design process, reducing late engineering design changes and reducing product material and labor complexity. It also includes powerful tools to achieve manufacturing costs savings by minimizing process variation, rework and the need for inspection. This chapter presents a general overview of DOE and an introduction to some fundamental concepts, objectives, steps and design guidelines to assist in conducting designed experiments.
 === Motivation===