Abstract

Useful numerical evaluations associated with three categories of Response Surface Methodology designs are presented with respect to five commonly encountered alphabetic optimality criteria. The first-order Plackett-Burman designs and the  Factorial designs are examined for the main effects models and the complete first-order models respectively. The second-order Central Composite Designs are examined for second-order models. The A-, D-, E-, G- and T-optimality criteria are employed as commonly encountered optimality criteria summarizing how good the experimental designs are. Relationships among the optimality criteria are pointed out with regards to the designs and the models. Generally the designs do not show uniform preferences in terms of the considered optimality criteria. However, one interesting finding is that central composite designs defined on cubes and hypercubes with unit axial distances are uniformly preferred in terms of E-optimality and G-optimality criteria.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.