Variance Dispersion Properties of Second-Order Response Surface Designs

Abstract

Often, second-order response surface designs are chosen on the basis of a single-valued criterion such as D- or G-optimality. While such criteria provide a useful basis for selecting designs, they often fail to convey the true nature of the design's support of the fitted model in terms of prediction properties over a region of interest. As an alternative to a single-valued criterion, we propose variance dispersion graphs to compare various second-order response surface designs. This graphical procedure is used to examine the relative strengths and weaknesses of such popular designs as the central composite, Box-Behnken, and small composite. Areas in the region of interest where prediction is relatively good and relatively poor are discussed, and designs which have good overall performance are highlighted. A summary comparison of such saturates or near-saturates designs as the hybrid, Box-Draper, and Notz designs is given together with recommendations concerning the proper choice among these designs. Finally, we show how the use of the D-optimality criterion can lead to misleading results when the user is truly interested in response surface prediction.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 80 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.