2010
DOI: 10.1021/ie1015574
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reply to “Some Observations on the Paper ‘Optimal Experimental Design for Discriminating Numerous Model Candidates—The AWDC Criterion’ ”

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 6 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Two criteria are usually proposed in the literature, namely, the sum over all model pairs, Donckels et al (2009), Schwaab et al (2006), Chen and Asprey (2003), Hunter and Reiner (1965) and the worst-case method, in which a max-min approach is applied, Cooney and McDonald (1995), Bambach et al (2013). As the motivating example of Michalik et al (2009) shows, the first criteria may lead to a bad solution, since the proposed experiment can originate a big separation between two particular models, at the same time that some of them are very close, giving an overall good result but an inefficient model selection method. Hence, in this paper, we will use as a discrepancy measure the max-min approach.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two criteria are usually proposed in the literature, namely, the sum over all model pairs, Donckels et al (2009), Schwaab et al (2006), Chen and Asprey (2003), Hunter and Reiner (1965) and the worst-case method, in which a max-min approach is applied, Cooney and McDonald (1995), Bambach et al (2013). As the motivating example of Michalik et al (2009) shows, the first criteria may lead to a bad solution, since the proposed experiment can originate a big separation between two particular models, at the same time that some of them are very close, giving an overall good result but an inefficient model selection method. Hence, in this paper, we will use as a discrepancy measure the max-min approach.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%