By Topic

Comparison of analysis strategies for screening designs in large-scale computer simulation models

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
Webb, T.S. ; Aeronaut. Syst. Center, Wright Res. & Dev. Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, USA ; Bauer, K.W.

In large-scale computer simulation models it is often necessary to perform a screening experiment to reduce the number of factors to be examined in subsequent analysis. This study evaluated the results of a Plackett-Burman screening design using three different analysis strategies: 1) an approach due to Box and Meyer (1993); 2) an approach due to Hamada and Wu (1992); and 3) a standard Response Surface Methodology (RSM) approach. These strategies or methodologies were used to identify the active/significant factors across 17 different model outputs. The results from these three methodologies were then compared against each other for any notable differences in the identified significant factors. In one instance, where there was a notable difference, further analysis was performed in an attempt to ascertain which methodology was the best predictor for that specific response. A Resolution V design was used in this subsequent analysis to produce a validation model, which was then used to compare the three initial analysis strategies. The strategy/methodology that produced the model with the smallest mean absolute percent error (MAPE), the measurement criteria, was selected as the best for that response.

Published in:

Simulation Conference Proceedings, 1994. Winter

Date of Conference:

11-14 Dec. 1994