Obsidian | Level 7

## Understanding output from optimal design using ADX interface

Hi all,

I am having trouble understanding the output in the results viewer under the "The OPTEX Procedure". I would like to know the d-efficiency of my design, but there are design numbers 1 - 10 listed in order of decreasing d-efficiency. Which design number relates to the experimental design just created? Can anyone share a link to maybe a tutorial or help page with a description of how to interpret the page I am looking at (screenshot below).

Thank you!

Optex Procedure output

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Diamond | Level 26

## Re: Understanding output from optimal design using ADX interface

@sarah123 wrote:

Thank you so much!

My understanding of Example 15.1 is that I should be seeing the "best" design, and that the more times the highest d-efficiency score is in the table, the more confident I should be that that is the the highest possible d-efficiency of available design runs.

I don't think "confident" is a word that applies here. In example 15.1, the first 6 different designs have equal D-optimality (in other words, by that criterion, there is no difference between these designs), while designs 7 through 9 are just slightly worse than the first 6.

And that if I were programming (rather than using the interface) I might be able to view Designs 2 and 7 and compare them with each other. Design 2 is equally as d-efficient as the one I am looking at already, however, it would have different combinations of attributes and levels. And Design 7 would be less d-efficient than either Design 1 and Design 2.

I think that's correct, although I would probably phrase it as "Design 7 would be very slightly less d-efficient than either Design 1 and Design 2."

--
Paige Miller
4 REPLIES 4
Super User

## Re: Understanding output from optimal design using ADX interface

See the first example in the PROC OPTEX Documentation.

Obsidian | Level 7

## Re: Understanding output from optimal design using ADX interface

Thank you so much!

My understanding of Example 15.1 is that I should be seeing the "best" design, and that the more times the highest d-efficiency score is in the table, the more confident I should be that that is the the highest possible d-efficiency of available design runs.

And that if I were programming (rather than using the interface) I might be able to view Designs 2 and 7 and compare them with each other. Design 2 is equally as d-efficient as the one I am looking at already, however, it would have different combinations of attributes and levels. And Design 7 would be less d-efficient than either Design 1 and Design 2.

Please let me know if I misunderstood anything.

Diamond | Level 26

## Re: Understanding output from optimal design using ADX interface

@sarah123 wrote:

Thank you so much!

My understanding of Example 15.1 is that I should be seeing the "best" design, and that the more times the highest d-efficiency score is in the table, the more confident I should be that that is the the highest possible d-efficiency of available design runs.

I don't think "confident" is a word that applies here. In example 15.1, the first 6 different designs have equal D-optimality (in other words, by that criterion, there is no difference between these designs), while designs 7 through 9 are just slightly worse than the first 6.

And that if I were programming (rather than using the interface) I might be able to view Designs 2 and 7 and compare them with each other. Design 2 is equally as d-efficient as the one I am looking at already, however, it would have different combinations of attributes and levels. And Design 7 would be less d-efficient than either Design 1 and Design 2.

I think that's correct, although I would probably phrase it as "Design 7 would be very slightly less d-efficient than either Design 1 and Design 2."

--
Paige Miller
Obsidian | Level 7

## Re: Understanding output from optimal design using ADX interface

Great! That helps a lot. Thank you

Discussion stats
• 4 replies
• 605 views
• 2 likes
• 3 in conversation