Designs of Experiments for Beginners—A Quick Start Guide for Application to Electrode Formulation
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
In this paper, we will describe in detail the setting up of a Design of Experiments (DoE) applied to the formulation of electrodes for Li-ion batteries. We will show that, with software guidance, Designs of Experiments are simple yet extremely useful statistical tools to set up and embrace. An Optimal Combined Design was used to identify influential factors and pinpoint the optimal formulation, according to the projected use. Our methodology follows an eight-step workflow adapted from the literature. Once the study objectives are clearly identified, it is necessary to consider the time, cost, and complexity of an experiment before choosing the responses that best describe the system, as well as the factors to vary. By strategically selecting the mixtures to be characterized, it is possible to minimize the number of experiments, and obtain a statistically relevant empirical equation which links responses and design factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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