Abstract
We investigate the role of orthogonal arrays (OAs) and balanced arrays (BAs) in both full and fractional factorial designs with N runs and m three-level quantitative factors. Firstly, due to the non-existence of the OA(18, 8, 3, 2), we find and construct a BA(18, 8, 3, 2) that represents the E-, A-, D-optimal design with \(N=18\) runs and \(m=8\) three-level factors under the main-effect model. Also, we are interested in comparing the OA(N, m, 3, 2)s with the BA(N, m, 3, 2)s, when they represent designs with \(N\equiv 0\) \((\text {mod}\) 9) runs and m three-level factors with respect to the E-, A-, D-criteria under the second-order model. We provide a generalized definition of balanced arrays. Moreover, we find and construct the OA(N, m, 3, 2)s and the BA(N, m, 3, 2)s that represent the E-, A-, D-optimal designs with \(N=9\), 18, 27, 36 runs and \(m=2\) three-level factors under the second-order model. Furthermore, it is shown that the BA(18, m, 3, 2)s, \(m=3\), 4 and a BA(27, 3, 3, 2) perform better than the OA(18, m, 3, 2)s, \(m=3\), 4 and the OA(27, 3, 3, 3), respectively, when they represent the corresponding designs with respect to the E-, A-, D-criteria under the second-order model.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Angelopoulos P, Evangelaras H, Koukouvinos C (2009) Model identification using \(27\) runs three level orthogonal arrays. J Appl Stat 36(1):33–38
Bird E (2016) The performance of orthogonal arrays with adjoined or unavailable runs. Dissertation, University of Technology Sydney
Bird E, Street DJ (2017) Table of ternary 18-run orthogonal arrays. http://preview.tinyurl.com/yb3onyxy. Accessed 23 March 2019
Bird E, Street DJ (2018) Complete enumeration of all geometrically non-isomorphic three-level orthogonal arrays in 18 runs. Aust J Comb 71(3):336–350
Chakravarti IM (1961) On some methods of construction of partially balanced arrays. Ann Math Stat 32:1181–1185
Cheng SW, Ye KQ (2004) Geometric isomorphism and minimum aberration for factorial designs with quantitative factors. Ann Stat 32:2168–2185
Dey A, Mukerjee R (1999) Fractional factorial plans. Wiley, New York
Hedayat AS, Sloane NJA, Stufken J (1999) Orthogonal arrays: theory and applications. Springer, New York
Kuwada M, Ikeda K (1998) Balanced fractional \(3^m\) factorial designs of resolution IV. J Stat Plan Inference 73:29–45
Lekivetz R, Tang B (2014) Multi-level orthogonal arrays for estimating main effects and specified interactions. J Stat Plan Inference 144:123–132
Pang F, Liu MQ (2011) Geometric isomorphism check for symmetric factorial designs. J Complex 27(5):441–448
Pericleous K, StA Chatzopoulos, Kolyva-Machera F, Kounias S (2017) Optimal designs for estimating linear and quadratic contrasts with three level factors, the case \({N}\equiv 0\)\((\text{ mod }\)\(3)\). Statistics 51:1061–1081
Taniguchi E, Hyodo Y, Kuwada M (2010) Balanced fractional \(3^m\) factorial designs of resolutions R(\(\{ 00,10,01 \}\cup S_1 \mid \Omega \)). Sci Math Jpn, pp 503–514
Tsai KJ, Ye KQ, Li W (2006) A complete catalog of geometrically nonisomorphic 18-run orthogonal arrays. Presented on the 2006 international conference on design of experiments and its applications
Tsai PW, Gilmour SG, Mead R (2000) Projective three-level main effects designs robust to model uncertainty. Biometrika 87(2):467–475
Wu CFJ, Hamada MS (2009) Experiments: planning, analysis, and optimization, 2nd edn. Wiley, New Jersey
Xu H, Cheng SW, Wu CFJ (2004) Optimal projective three-level designs for factor screening and interaction detection. Technometrics 46(3):280–292
Acknowledgements
The editors would like to express their deep appreciation to the referees for the valuable and constructive suggestions that greatly improved the present article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Algorithm 1
Step 1: The first factor of the first block is (0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2) and the first factor of the second block is (0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 2).
Step 2: Write all factors having in the first 6 places 0 0 1 1 2 2, in the next 6 elements 0 0 1 1 2 2 and in the last 6 places 0 0 1 1 2 2. This is set S and has \(\left( \left( {\begin{array}{c}6\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \left( {\begin{array}{c}6-2\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \left( {\begin{array}{c}6-2-2\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \right) ^{3}=90^{3}=729000\) factors.
Step 3: Find from the set S the factors that satisfy, with the first factor of the second block, the relations \(n _{12}^{pq} =2\), p, \(q=0\), 1, 2. This is set G.
Step 4: From the set G form groups of factors that satisfy between them the relations \(n_{11}^{pq}=2\), p, \(q=0\), 1, 2. If a group has 5 factors then we have the first block.
Step 5: Find from the set S the factors that satisfy, with the last 5 factors of the first block, the relations \(n_{12}^{pq}=2\), p, \(q=0\), 1, 2 and, with the first factor from the second block, the relations \(n_{22}^{11}=\textit{n}_{22}^{02}=\textit{n}_{22}^{20}=0\), \(n_{22}^{00}=n_{22}^{22} =n_{22}^{01}=n_{22}^{10}=n_{22}^{12}=n_{22}^{21}=3\). If there is one factor, then we have the BA(18, 8, 3, 2), \(s_1=6\), \(s_2=2\).
Algorithm 2
Step 1: Choose a value of N and find all the \(1\times 9\) vectors \(\mathbf{x} =(x_1, \ldots , x_9)\) of integers such that \(\sum _{i=1}^{9}x_i=N\).
Step 2: For each vector \(\mathbf{x} \) construct the vectors \(\mathbf{v} =(v_1, v_2, v_3)\) and \(\mathbf{r} =(r_1, r_2, r_3)\), such that \(v_1=\sum _{i=1}^{3}x_i\), \(v_2=\sum _{i=4}^{6}x_i\), \(v_3=\sum _{i=7}^{9}x_i\) and \(r_1=\sum _{i=1,4,7}x_i\), \(r_2=\sum _{i=2,5,8}x_i\), \(r_3=\sum _{i=3,6,9}x_i\).
Step 3: Keep the vectors x for which \(v_i\ge 1\) and \(r_i\ge 1\) for any \(i=1\), 2, 3, and at least two elements of both v and r are equal. For these vectors x it holds that \(\mathbf{x} =(n^{00}, n^{01}, n^{02}, n^{10}, n^{11}, n^{12}, n^{20}, n^{21}, n^{22})\) or \(\mathbf{x} =(n_{12}^{00}, n_{12}^{01}, n_{12}^{02}, n_{12}^{10}, n_{12}^{11}, n_{12}^{12}, n_{12}^{20}, n_{12}^{21}, n_{12}^{22})\).
Step 4: For each vector of Step 3 construct the corresponding OA(N, 2, 3, 2) or BA(N, 2, 3, 2), according to Definition 3, and obtain the array (orthogonal or balanced) that represents the E-, A-, D-optimal design with N runs and \(m=2\) three-level factors under model (2).
Appendix 2
Let \(n_{ijk}^{pqr}\) be the number of times factors \(F_i\), \(F_j\), \(F_k\) appear together at levels p, q, r, respectively, and \(n_{ijko}^{pqrt}\) be the number of times factors \(F_i\), \(F_j\), \(F_k\), \(F_o\) appear together at levels p, q, r, t, respectively, in the N runs, where p, q, r, \(t=0\), 1, 2, \(i\ne j\ne k\ne o=1,\ldots ,m\).
Let B be a \(m\times \left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \) matrix with elements for \(i\ne j<k=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
and for \(i\ne j=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
\(\mathbf{B} ^{(1)}\) be a \(m\times \left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \) matrix with elements for \(i=1,\ldots ,m\), \(j<k=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
C be a \(m\times \left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \) matrix with elements for \(i\ne j<k=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
and for \(i\ne j=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
\(\mathbf{C} ^{(1)}\) be a \(m\times \left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \) matrix with elements for \(i=1,\ldots ,m\), \(j<k=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
D be a \(\left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \times \left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \) symmetric matrix with diagonal elements for \(i\ne j=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
off-diagonal elements for \(i\ne j\ne k=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
and for \(i\ne j\ne k\ne o=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
and \(\mathbf{D} ^{(1)}\) be a \(\left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \times \left( {\begin{array}{c}m\\ 2\end{array}}\right) \) symmetric matrix with elements for \(i<j=1,\ldots ,m\), \(k<o=1,\ldots ,m\) equal to
For the information matrix M in (3) holds
and
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chasiotis, V., Chatzopoulos, S.A., Kounias, S. et al. On the optimality of orthogonal and balanced arrays with \(N\equiv 0\) \((\text {mod}\) 9) runs. Stat Papers 62, 1965–1980 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-020-01167-3
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-020-01167-3