One-factor-at-a-time method: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:02, 9 June 2017

Revision as of 04:06, 7 September 2017

Line 19:

3. OFAT can miss optimal settings of factors

Designed experiments remain nearly always preferred to OFAT with many types and methods available,<ref>See Category: Experimental design, at bottom.</ref> in addition to fractional factorials which, though usually requiring more runs than OFAT, do address the three concerns above.<ref name=Czitrom>[httphttps://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst?docId=5001888588 Czitrom (1999) "One-Factor-at-a-Time Versus Designed Experiments", American Statistician, 53, 2.]</ref> <!--formerly http://www.amstat.org/publications/tas/czitrom.pdf--> One modern design over which OFAT has no advantage in number of runs is the [[Plackett-Burman design|Plackett-Burman]] which, by having all factors vary simultaneously (an important quality in experimental designs),<ref name=Czitrom /> gives generally [[Efficiency (statistics)|greater precision in effect estimation]].

== References==