Efficiency measure, modelling and estimation in combined array designs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In off‐line quality control, the settings that minimize the variance of a quality characteristic are unknown and must be determined based on an estimated dual response model of mean and variance. The present paper proposes a direct measure of the efficiency of any given design‐estimation procedure for variance minimization. This not only facilitates the comparison of different design‐estimation procedures, but may also provide a guideline for choosing a better solution when the estimated dual response model suggests multiple solutions. Motivated by the analysis of an industrial experiment on spray painting, the present paper also applies a class of link functions to model process variances in off‐line quality control. For model fitting, a parametric distribution is employed in updating the variance estimates used in an iteratively weighted least squares procedure for mean estimation. In analysing combined array experiments, Engel and Huele (Technometrics, 1996; 39:365) used log‐link to model process variances and considered an iteratively weighted least squares leading to the pseudo‐likelihood estimates of variances as discussed in Carroll and Ruppert (Transformation and Weighting in Regression, Chapman & Hall: New York). Their method is a special case of the approach considered in this paper. It is seen for the spray paint data that the log‐link may not be satisfactory and the class of link functions considered here improves substantially the fit to process variances. This conclusion is reached with a suggested method of comparing ‘empirical variances’ with the ‘theoretical variances’ based on the assumed model. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it