confirmations of some doubts in efficient designs
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:13 pm
Dear Ngene experts:
Thank you very much for your previous reply. Now I still encountered some questions, If I can get your help, I would appreciate it very much.
This is my syntax:
Design
;alts=alt1*,alt2*,alt3
;rows=20
;block=4
;eff=(mnl,d)
;model:
U(alt1)=b1.effects[0.001]*A[1,0]+b2.effects[0.003|0.002|0.001]*B[3,2,1,0]+b3.effects[0.001|0.001|0.001]*C[3,2,1,0]+b4[0.001]*D[3,2,1,0]+b5[-0.001]*E[3,2,1,0]/
U(alt2)=b1*A+b2*B+b3*C+b4*D+b5*E/
U(alt3)=b0[0]
$
And my questions are:
1 My variable D and variable E are continuous variables. Do I handle the syntax correctly (i.e. b4[0.001]*D[3,2,1,0]+b5[-0.001]*E[3,2,1,0])? After reading the “Ngene user manual”, I have a question: why does the continuous variable described in Chapter 9.2(Design with continuous levels in Ngene) of the manual use a more complex syntax? Is there any difference between contents described in Chapter 9.2 and the syntax above I used to describe continuous variables D and E(i.e. b4[0.001]*D[3,2,1,0]+b5[-0.001]*E[3,2,1,0])?
2 There is a paragraph in section 7.1.9(Generate efficient design) of the manual:” In general column based algorithms offer more flexibility and can deal with larger designs, but in some cases(for unlabeled designs and for specific designs such as constrained designs ,see Section 8.2) row based algorithms are more suitable.” As shown above, my design is an unlabeled design. Do I need to change my current syntax to a row based algorithms are more suitable.”
As shown above, my design is a unlabeled design. Do I need to change my current syntax to a row based algorithms? Is it ok if I continue to use column based algorithms?
3 As shown above, variable A only has two levels. Is it feasible to use effect coding for variables with only two levels?
4 After running the above syntax. I get a D error of 0.157381 and a S estimate of 1130252.377918. Is this D error ok? What range of D error can we say that this design is efficient? In addition, does the S estimate mean that I need to investigate 1130252 samples? Is there any way to reduce it?
5 There is a “segment number” in “Insert into title” of “Configuration scenario formatting” I have never understood what “segment number” means? So I want to ask for your help.
6 In efficient design, if the iteration history of the last line is not updated after half an hour, can it be regarded as the final design?
Thank you again for your help.
Thank you very much for your previous reply. Now I still encountered some questions, If I can get your help, I would appreciate it very much.
This is my syntax:
Design
;alts=alt1*,alt2*,alt3
;rows=20
;block=4
;eff=(mnl,d)
;model:
U(alt1)=b1.effects[0.001]*A[1,0]+b2.effects[0.003|0.002|0.001]*B[3,2,1,0]+b3.effects[0.001|0.001|0.001]*C[3,2,1,0]+b4[0.001]*D[3,2,1,0]+b5[-0.001]*E[3,2,1,0]/
U(alt2)=b1*A+b2*B+b3*C+b4*D+b5*E/
U(alt3)=b0[0]
$
And my questions are:
1 My variable D and variable E are continuous variables. Do I handle the syntax correctly (i.e. b4[0.001]*D[3,2,1,0]+b5[-0.001]*E[3,2,1,0])? After reading the “Ngene user manual”, I have a question: why does the continuous variable described in Chapter 9.2(Design with continuous levels in Ngene) of the manual use a more complex syntax? Is there any difference between contents described in Chapter 9.2 and the syntax above I used to describe continuous variables D and E(i.e. b4[0.001]*D[3,2,1,0]+b5[-0.001]*E[3,2,1,0])?
2 There is a paragraph in section 7.1.9(Generate efficient design) of the manual:” In general column based algorithms offer more flexibility and can deal with larger designs, but in some cases(for unlabeled designs and for specific designs such as constrained designs ,see Section 8.2) row based algorithms are more suitable.” As shown above, my design is an unlabeled design. Do I need to change my current syntax to a row based algorithms are more suitable.”
As shown above, my design is a unlabeled design. Do I need to change my current syntax to a row based algorithms? Is it ok if I continue to use column based algorithms?
3 As shown above, variable A only has two levels. Is it feasible to use effect coding for variables with only two levels?
4 After running the above syntax. I get a D error of 0.157381 and a S estimate of 1130252.377918. Is this D error ok? What range of D error can we say that this design is efficient? In addition, does the S estimate mean that I need to investigate 1130252 samples? Is there any way to reduce it?
5 There is a “segment number” in “Insert into title” of “Configuration scenario formatting” I have never understood what “segment number” means? So I want to ask for your help.
6 In efficient design, if the iteration history of the last line is not updated after half an hour, can it be regarded as the final design?
Thank you again for your help.