2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2017.03.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Response surface experiments: A meta-analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, the screening phase plays a very important role in the RSM, because the monetary and time costs of experimentation grow exponentially with the number of variables or factors in the subsequent phases of experimentation. How to identify the location effects (those that have effect on response mean) from unreplicated designs has been a widely researched topic, and three general guidelines (see Ockuly et al [57] for an empirical quantification of these guidelines in the RSM framework based on a meta-analysis) must be considered in the results interpretation: a) Only a small fraction of tested factors will be active (influence or have a statistically significant effect on response). This is called the effects sparsity principle.…”
Section: Doe-experimental Design Selection and Results Analysis Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus, the screening phase plays a very important role in the RSM, because the monetary and time costs of experimentation grow exponentially with the number of variables or factors in the subsequent phases of experimentation. How to identify the location effects (those that have effect on response mean) from unreplicated designs has been a widely researched topic, and three general guidelines (see Ockuly et al [57] for an empirical quantification of these guidelines in the RSM framework based on a meta-analysis) must be considered in the results interpretation: a) Only a small fraction of tested factors will be active (influence or have a statistically significant effect on response). This is called the effects sparsity principle.…”
Section: Doe-experimental Design Selection and Results Analysis Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With this (small) set of variables, a two-level fractional factorial design (2 k-p design with k variables or factors and p independent generators) was selected. This design type is often used for screening in physical and simulation experiments when the number of variables is small (say up to about 15 to 20 variables, as it is common in physical experiments) due to their efficiency, effectiveness, and versatility for sequential experimentation [57,84]. In 2 k-p designs, each factor is tested at two levels and only a fraction (1/2 p ) of all factor-level combinations are run.…”
Section: Design and Analysis Of Experiments: Theoretical Framework Anmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Coefficients of determinations ( R 2 ) values of between 0.51 and 0.96 were obtained for the regression models. The insignificant lack of fit of the presented model for the SC, EEC, and PR responses shows that it is suitable for making the predictions (Ockuly, Weese, Smucker, Edwards, & Chang, ). Regression analyses indicated that the special cubic model was significant ( p < .05) for modeling the SC, and the cubic model was significant ( p < .05) for modeling the EEC and PR, but not significant ( p > .05) for the RC response.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regression analyses indicated that the special cubic model was significant ( p < .05) for modeling the SC, and the cubic model was significant ( p < .05) for modeling the EEC and PR, but not significant ( p > .05) for the RC response. In these models, a positive partial regression coefficient value for nonlinear terms implies a synergistic effect of the constituents in the binary or ternary blends, whereas the corresponding negative value is indicative of antagonistic effects (Ockuly et al, ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Model selection methods that possess Property 3 can restrict the search space to specific sets of meaningful models such as those obeying weak or strong effect heredity (Hamada and Wu, 1992), where it is assumed that an interaction or a quadratic effect can be active only if its corresponding main effect(s) are also active. Based on a meta-analysis of a large number of two-level factorial experiments and response surface experiments, Li et al (2006) and Ockuly et al (2017) showed that effect heredity generally holds in practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%