cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Check out the JMP® Marketplace featured Capability Explorer add-in
Choose Language Hide Translation Bar
Wardiam
Level I

How to correctly interpret a definitive screening design (DSD)

I am using JMP 14.3 to optimize a workflow with 6 input variables and 3 levels (attached is the file with the data table). My idea is to use JMP to obtain the best combination of the 6 variables that gives me the best output result but performing the least number of experiments.


It seems to me that the best option is to make a definitive screening design to see the main effects. I have defined my factor table with the extreme values (minimum and maximum for each variable) and I have created the table of experiments to be performed. The generated table proposes 17 experiments.


During several weeks I have carried out the 17 experiments and I have added the results (Y) in the attached table. With these data I have adjusted the screening and I have obtained that 4 of the variables are statistically significant. I have selected in the prediction profiler: Optimization and Desirability > Maximize Desirability, to obtain the most optimal combination of factors.


At this point I have several questions:

 

1. What values/levels should I choose for the non-significant values?. Could I choose any of them?.

2. I would like to create a model to predict or estimate the output (Y) based on the selected values of the factors. How could I do this?. Could I simulate a larger number of values?.

3. Could I get an equation (or formula from the model)?.

 

Thank you very much.

 

Best regards,

Wardiam

10 REPLIES 10
CanonicalHazard
Level III

Re: How to correctly interpret a definitive screening design (DSD)

I think this might be the explanation I was looking for, a reminder that a DSD is a screening design and the claim it has low power for quadratic effects.  Just need to figure out how to get this power analysis for my DSDs, as all I see is the power for main effects -- not the interactions and quadratics.

 

https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Fit-Definitive-Screening-vs-Stepwise-min-AICC-for-model/m-p...