<?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 Reducing a model to only one-two terms in Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Reducing-a-model-to-only-one-two-terms/m-p/781657#M96443</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm currently analyzing a 4 factor half-factorial design. My pareto chart is indicating that only one-two main effects for given responses are significant. Would it be acceptable to remove the remaining insignificant main effect and interaction terms from the model?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've trialed this, by reducing the model as described above. The R2 and Adjusted R2 are close (0.68 vs 0.63), so not fantastic. However, I don't think I should be adding in the insignificant terms and risk overfitting the model. Could anybody advise?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2024 15:55:03 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>DoEDorkily123</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-08-14T15:55:03Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Reducing a model to only one-two terms</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Reducing-a-model-to-only-one-two-terms/m-p/781657#M96443</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm currently analyzing a 4 factor half-factorial design. My pareto chart is indicating that only one-two main effects for given responses are significant. Would it be acceptable to remove the remaining insignificant main effect and interaction terms from the model?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've trialed this, by reducing the model as described above. The R2 and Adjusted R2 are close (0.68 vs 0.63), so not fantastic. However, I don't think I should be adding in the insignificant terms and risk overfitting the model. Could anybody advise?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2024 15:55:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Reducing-a-model-to-only-one-two-terms/m-p/781657#M96443</guid>
      <dc:creator>DoEDorkily123</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-08-14T15:55:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Reducing a model to only one-two terms</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Reducing-a-model-to-only-one-two-terms/m-p/781675#M96444</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Without seeing the other diagnostic information or the actual output from your experiment, it is difficult to give a specific set of advice. &amp;nbsp;That being said, it would typically be appropriate to remove insignificant terms from the model. &amp;nbsp;Do the results make sense? &amp;nbsp;Are the factors practically significant? How do the results compare to your predictions? How much did the R-square adj change when you removed the terms? &amp;nbsp;What do the residuals look like? &amp;nbsp;Leverage plots? What happened to the RMSE?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2024 17:11:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Reducing-a-model-to-only-one-two-terms/m-p/781675#M96444</guid>
      <dc:creator>statman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-08-14T17:11:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

