Robust integer-valued designs for linear random intercept models

This article considers the robust design problem for linear random intercept models with both departures from fixed effects and correlated errors on a finite design space. Two strategies are proposed. One is a worst-case method minimizing the maximum value of the MSE of estimates for the fixed effects over the departure. The other is an average-case method minimizing the average value of the MSE with respect to some priors for the class of departure functions and correlation structures of random errors. Two examples are given to show robust designs for two polynomial models.     

A generalisation of T‐optimality for discriminating between competing models with an application to pharmacokinetic studies

The T‐optimality criterion is used in optimal design to derive designs for model selection. To set up the method, it is required that one of the models is considered to be true. We term this local T‐optimality. In this work, we propose a generalisation of T‐optimality (termed robust T‐optimality) that relaxes the requirement that one of the candidate models is set as true. We then show an application to a nonlinear mixed effects model with two candidate non‐nested models and combine robust T‐optimality with robust D‐optimality. Optimal design under local T‐optimality was found to provide adequate power when the a priori assumed true model was the true model but poor power if the a priori assumed true model was not the true model. The robust T‐optimality method provided adequate power irrespective of which model was true. The robust T‐optimality method appears to have useful properties for nonlinear models, where both the parameter values and model structure are required to be known a priori, and the most likely model that would be applied to any new experiment is not known with certainty. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Some new third order designs robust to one missing observation

Abstract

In real experimentation, we often face situations where observations are lost, ignored or unavailable due to some accident or high cost experiments. Missing observations can make the results of a response surface experiment quite misleading. Therefore minimaxloss designs for Augmented Box-Behnken Designs (ABBDs) and Augmented Fractional Box-Behnken Designs (AFBBDs) are formulated under a minimaxloss criterion. These minimaxloss designs are considered to be robust to one missing observation and the investigation has been made in this article. Then G-efficiencies and Relative D-efficiencies of minimaxloss ABBDs and AFBBDs have been discussed.     

A relaxation procedure for calculating (G–)minimax optimal designs

Summary: In nonlinear statistical models, standard optimality functions for experimental designs depend on the unknown parameters of the model. An appealing and robust concept for choosing a design is the minimax criterion. However, so far, minimax optimal designs have been calculated efficiently under various restrictive conditions only. We extend an iterative relaxation scheme originally proposed by Shimizu and Aiyoshi (1980) and prove its convergence under very general assumptions which cover a variety of situations considered in experimental design. Application to different specific design criteria is discussed and issues of practical implementation are addressed. First numerical results suggest that the method may be very efficient with respect to the number of iterations required.*Supported by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. We are grateful to a referee for his constructive suggestions.     

Maximin efficient design of experiment for exponential regression models

In this paper robust and efficient designs are derived for several exponential decay models. These models are widely used in chemistry, pharmacokinetics or microbiology. We propose a maximin approach, which determines the optimal design such that a minimum of the D-efficiencies (taken over a certain range) becomes maximal. Analytic solutions are derived if optimization is performed in the class of minimal supported designs. In general the optimal designs with respect to the maximin criterion have to be determined numerically and some properties of these designs are also studied. We also illustrate the benefits of our approach by reanalysing a data example from the literature.     

A note on the unification of the Akaike information criterion

To measure the distance between a robust function evaluated under the true regression model and under a fitted model, we propose generalized Kullback–Leibler information. Using this generalization we have developed three robust model selection criteria, AICR*, AICCR* and AICCR, that allow the selection of candidate models that not only fit the majority of the data but also take into account non-normally distributed errors. The AICR* and AICCR criteria can unify most existing Akaike information criteria; three examples of such unification are given. Simulation studies are presented to illustrate the relative performance of each criterion.     

Robust designs for experiments with blocks

ABSTRACT

For experiments running in field plots or over time, the observations are often correlated due to spatial or serial correlation, which leads to correlated errors in a linear model analyzing the treatment means. Without knowing the exact correlation matrix of the errors, it is not possible to compute the generalized least-squares estimator for the treatment means and use it to construct optimal designs for the experiments. In this paper, we propose to use neighborhoods to model the covariance matrix of the errors, and apply a modified generalized least-squares estimator to construct robust designs for experiments with blocks. A minimax design criterion is investigated, and a simulated annealing algorithm is developed to find robust designs. We have derived several theoretical results, and representative examples are presented.     

Robust designs for misspecified logistic models

We develop criteria that generate robust designs and use such criteria for the construction of designs that insure against possible misspecifications in logistic regression models. The design criteria we propose are different from the classical in that we do not focus on sampling error alone. Instead we use design criteria that account as well for error due to bias engendered by the model misspecification. Our robust designs optimize the average of a function of the sampling error and bias error over a specified misspecification neighbourhood. Examples of robust designs for logistic models are presented, including a case study implementing the methodologies using beetle mortality data.     

Generalized Youden designs: construction and tables

Generalized Youden Designs are generalizations of the class of two-way balanced block designs which include Latin squares and Youden squares. They are used for the same purposes and in the same way that these classical designs are used, and satisfy most of the common criteria of design optimality.We explicitly display or give detailed instructions for constructing all these designs within a practical range: when υ, the number of treatments, is ?25; and b₁ and b₂, the dimensions of the design array, are each ?50.     

Comparison of design for quadratic regression on cubes

Designs for quadratic regression are considered when the possible choices of the controllable variable are points x=(x₁,x₂,…,x_q) in the q-dimensional cube of side 2. The designs that are optimum with respect to such criteria as those of D-, A-, and E-optimality are compared in their performance relative to these and other criteria. Some of the results are developed algebraically; others, numerically. The possible supports of E-optimum designs are much more numerous than the D-optimum supports characterized earlier. The A-optimum design appears to be fairly robust in its efficiency, under variation of criterion.     

On the consistency and the robustness in model selection criteria

Abstract

In the model selection problem, the consistency of the selection criterion has been often discussed. This paper derives a family of criteria based on a robust statistical divergence family by using a generalized Bayesian procedure. The proposed family can achieve both consistency and robustness at the same time since it has good performance with respect to contamination by outliers under appropriate circumstances. We show the selection accuracy of the proposed criterion family compared with the conventional methods through numerical experiments.     

Spatial sampling design for parameter estimation of the covariance function

We study the spatial optimal sampling design for covariance parameter estimation. The spatial process is modeled as a Gaussian random field and maximum likelihood (ML) is used to estimate the covariance parameters. We use the log determinant of the inverse Fisher information matrix as the design criterion and run simulations to investigate the relationship between the inverse Fisher information matrix and the covariance matrix of the ML estimates. A simulated annealing algorithm is developed to search for an optimal design among all possible designs on a fine grid. Since the design criterion depends on the unknown parameters, we define relative efficiency of a design and consider minimax and Bayesian criteria to find designs that are robust for a range of parameter values. Simulation results are presented for the Matérn class of covariance functions.     

Robust two-level regular fractional factorial designs

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce the concept of model quality for two-level regular fractional factorial designs. Under the effect hierarchy principle, this paper raises the definition of model quality and introduces robust model-number pattern (RP) to choose the optimal robust design. Some theoretical results on this optimality and comparisons with GMC and MEC criterion are given.     

Constructing optimal projection designs

ABSTRACT

The early stages of many real-life experiments involve a large number of factors among which only a few factors are active. Unfortunately, the optimal full-dimensional designs of those early stages may have bad low-dimensional projections and the experimenters do not know which factors turn out to be important before conducting the experiment. Therefore, designs with good projections are desirable for factor screening. In this regard, significant questions are arising such as whether the optimal full-dimensional designs have good projections onto low dimensions? How experimenters can measure the goodness of a full-dimensional design by focusing on all of its projections?, and are there linkages between the optimality of a full-dimensional design and the optimality of its projections? Through theoretical justifications, this paper tries to provide answers to these interesting questions by investigating the construction of optimal (average) projection designs for screening either nominal or quantitative factors. The main results show that: based on the aberration and orthogonality criteria the full-dimensional design is optimal if and only if it is optimal projection design; the full-dimensional design is optimal via the aberration and orthogonality if and only if it is uniform projection design; there is no guarantee that a uniform full-dimensional design is optimal projection design via any criterion; the projection design is optimal via the aberration, orthogonality and uniformity criteria if it is optimal via any criterion of them; and the saturated orthogonal designs have the same average projection performance.     

Response surface design evaluation and comparison

Designing an experiment to fit a response surface model typically involves selecting among several candidate designs. There are often many competing criteria that could be considered in selecting the design, and practitioners are typically forced to make trade-offs between these objectives when choosing the final design. Traditional alphabetic optimality criteria are often used in evaluating and comparing competing designs. These optimality criteria are single-number summaries for quality properties of the design such as the precision with which the model parameters are estimated or the uncertainty associated with prediction. Other important considerations include the robustness of the design to model misspecification and potential problems arising from spurious or missing data. Several qualitative and quantitative properties of good response surface designs are discussed, and some of their important trade-offs are considered. Graphical methods for evaluating design performance for several important response surface problems are discussed and we show how these techniques can be used to compare competing designs. These graphical methods are generally superior to the simplistic summaries of alphabetic optimality criteria. Several special cases are considered, including robust parameter designs, split-plot designs, mixture experiment designs, and designs for generalized linear models.     

Optimal discrimination designs for exponential regression models

We investigate optimal designs for discriminating between exponential regression models of different complexity, which are widely used in the biological sciences; see, e.g., Landaw [1995. Robust sampling designs for compartmental models under large prior eigenvalue uncertainties. Math. Comput. Biomed. Appl. 181–187] or Gibaldi and Perrier [1982. Pharmacokinetics. Marcel Dekker, New York]. We discuss different approaches for the construction of appropriate optimality criteria, and find sharper upper bounds on the number of support points of locally optimal discrimination designs than those given by Caratheodory's Theorem. These results greatly facilitate the numerical construction of optimal designs. Various examples of optimal designs are then presented and compared to different other designs. Moreover, to protect the experiment against misspecifications of the nonlinear model parameters, we adapt the design criteria such that the resulting designs are robust with respect to such misspecifications and, again, provide several examples, which demonstrate the advantages of our approach.     

Three-level main-effects designs exploiting prior information about model uncertainty

To explore the projection efficiency of a design, Tsai, et al [2000. Projective three-level main effects designs robust to model uncertainty. Biometrika 87, 467–475] introduced the Q criterion to compare three-level main-effects designs for quantitative factors that allow the consideration of interactions in addition to main effects. In this paper, we extend their method and focus on the case in which experimenters have some prior knowledge, in advance of running the experiment, about the probabilities of effects being non-negligible. A criterion which incorporates experimenters’ prior beliefs about the importance of each effect is introduced to compare orthogonal, or nearly orthogonal, main effects designs with robustness to interactions as a secondary consideration. We show that this criterion, exploiting prior information about model uncertainty, can lead to more appropriate designs reflecting experimenters’ prior beliefs.     

Bayesian model comparison based on expected posterior priors for discrete decomposable graphical models

The implementation of the Bayesian paradigm to model comparison can be problematic. In particular, prior distributions on the parameter space of each candidate model require special care. While it is well known that improper priors cannot be routinely used for Bayesian model comparison, we claim that also the use of proper conventional priors under each model should be regarded as suspicious, especially when comparing models having different dimensions. The basic idea is that priors should not be assigned separately under each model; rather they should be related across models, in order to acquire some degree of compatibility, and thus allow fairer and more robust comparisons. In this connection, the intrinsic prior as well as the expected posterior prior (EPP) methodology represent a useful tool. In this paper we develop a procedure based on EPP to perform Bayesian model comparison for discrete undirected decomposable graphical models, although our method could be adapted to deal also with directed acyclic graph models. We present two possible approaches. One based on imaginary data, and one which makes use of a limited number of actual data. The methodology is illustrated through the analysis of a 2×3×4 contingency table.     

Optimal experimental design criterion for discriminating semiparametric models

This paper studies the optimal experimental design problem to discriminate two regression models. Recently, López-Fidalgo et al. [2007. An optimal experimental design criterion for discriminating between non-normal models. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. B 69, 231–242] extended the conventional T-optimality criterion by Atkinson and Fedorov [1975a. The designs of experiments for discriminating between two rival models. Biometrika 62, 57–70; 1975b. Optimal design: experiments for discriminating between several models. Biometrika 62, 289–303] to deal with non-normal parametric regression models, and proposed a new optimal experimental design criterion based on the Kullback–Leibler information divergence. In this paper, we extend their parametric optimality criterion to a semiparametric setup, where we only need to specify some moment conditions for the null or alternative regression model. Our criteria, called the semiparametric Kullback–Leibler optimality criteria, can be implemented by applying a convex duality result of partially finite convex programming. The proposed method is illustrated by a simple numerical example.