<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Understanding Prediction Profiler Results Of Full Factorial With All Main Effects In Model in Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Understanding-Prediction-Profiler-Results-Of-Full-Factorial-With/m-p/569190#M77975</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello All,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a data set that is a full factorial of 3 categorical independent variables and 1 continuous dependent variable. This was not a designed test and contains no repeated data points. The Standard Least Squares model that I'd like to use contains all 3 main effects and 1 2-way interaction. My concern with the prediction profiler is that it is producing confidence intervals based on a sample size of 1 for each treatment. Are these intervals still okay to use based on how JMP looks at each main effect individually and the data set as a whole? Should I only look at the predicted values and ignore the confidence intervals? Is there a better approach that I should be using with this data set? Thanks in advance!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jun 2023 00:57:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>GarnetHeart</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-06-09T00:57:10Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Understanding Prediction Profiler Results Of Full Factorial With All Main Effects In Model</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Understanding-Prediction-Profiler-Results-Of-Full-Factorial-With/m-p/569190#M77975</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello All,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a data set that is a full factorial of 3 categorical independent variables and 1 continuous dependent variable. This was not a designed test and contains no repeated data points. The Standard Least Squares model that I'd like to use contains all 3 main effects and 1 2-way interaction. My concern with the prediction profiler is that it is producing confidence intervals based on a sample size of 1 for each treatment. Are these intervals still okay to use based on how JMP looks at each main effect individually and the data set as a whole? Should I only look at the predicted values and ignore the confidence intervals? Is there a better approach that I should be using with this data set? Thanks in advance!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jun 2023 00:57:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Understanding-Prediction-Profiler-Results-Of-Full-Factorial-With/m-p/569190#M77975</guid>
      <dc:creator>GarnetHeart</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-06-09T00:57:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Understanding Prediction Profiler Results Of Full Factorial With All Main Effects In Model</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Understanding-Prediction-Profiler-Results-Of-Full-Factorial-With/m-p/569204#M77977</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;First, welcome to the community. &amp;nbsp;I have the following thoughts and questions:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;First, with the very limited information you provided and lack of any pictures of output or attaching the data table, we are extremely limited on advice we can supply.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;1. You say "&lt;SPAN&gt;This was not a designed test". &amp;nbsp;What do you mean by this? &amp;nbsp;Is this an experiment you designed and ran?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;2. Do you have any idea of the measurement system uncertainty?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;3. Is there a practical amount of variation in the response&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;variable? (did it change enough?) How do the results compare with your predictions?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;3. Since you have no replication, the terms that were left out of the model are the basis for any statistical test. &amp;nbsp;This is often a biased test. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;4. Try saturating the model and evaluate the Normal and Pareto plots. &amp;nbsp;Did you look at the residuals? &amp;nbsp;Did you look at the interaction plot? &amp;nbsp;Do the answers make sense?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2022 19:17:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Understanding-Prediction-Profiler-Results-Of-Full-Factorial-With/m-p/569204#M77977</guid>
      <dc:creator>statman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-11-14T19:17:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

