/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 68 In their book Empirical Model Bu... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

In their book Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces (John Wiley, 1987 ), Box and Draper described an experiment with three factors. The data in the following table are a variation of the original experiment from their book. Suppose that these data were collected in a semiconductor manufacturing process. (a) The response \(y\), is the average of three readings on resistivity for a single wafer. Fit a quadratic model to this response. (b) The response \(y_{2}\) is the standard deviation of the three resistivity measurements. Fit a linear model to this response. (c) Where would you recommend that we set \(x_{1}, x_{2},\) and \(x_{3}\) if the objective is to hold mean resistivity at 500 and minimize the standard deviation? $$ \begin{array}{rrrrr} \hline x_{1} & x_{2} & x_{3} & y_{1} & y_{2} \\ \hline-1 & -1 & -1 & 24.00 & 12.49 \\ 0 & -1 & -1 & 120.33 & 8.39 \\ 1 & -1 & -1 & 213.67 & 42.83 \\ -1 & 0 & -1 & 86.00 & 3.46 \\ 0 & 0 & -1 & 136.63 & 80.41 \\ 1 & 0 & -1 & 340.67 & 16.17 \\ -1 & 1 & -1 & 112.33 & 27.57 \\ 0 & 1 & -1 & 256.33 & 4.62 \\ 1 & 1 & -1 & 271.67 & 23.63 \\ -1 & -1 & 0 & 81.00 & 0.00 \\ 0 & -1 & 0 & 101.67 & 17.67 \\ 1 & -1 & 0 & 357.00 & 32.91 \\ -1 & 0 & 0 & 171.33 & 15.01 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 372.00 & 0.00 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 & 501.67 & 92.50 \\ -1 & 1 & 0 & 264.00 & 63.50 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 427.00 & 88.61 \\ \hline 1 & 1 & 0 & 730.67 & 21.08 \\ -1 & -1 & 1 & 220.67 & 133.82 \\ 0 & -1 & 1 & 239.67 & 23.46 \\ 1 & -1 & 1 & 422.00 & 18.52 \\ -1 & 0 & 1 & 199.00 & 29.44 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 485.33 & 44.67 \\ 1 & 0 & 1 & 673.67 & 158.21 \\ -1 & 1 & 1 & 176.67 & 55.51 \\ 0 & 1 & 1 & 501.00 & 138.94 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & 1010.00 & 142.45 \end{array} $$

Short Answer

Expert verified
Fit a quadratic model for \(y_1\), a linear model for \(y_2\), and use model outputs to balance \(y_1\) at 500 minimizing \(y_2\).

Step by step solution

01

Understanding the Model Structure

A quadratic model includes the linear terms \(x_1, x_2, x_3\), the squared terms \(x_1^2, x_2^2, x_3^2\), and the interaction terms \(x_1x_2, x_1x_3, x_2x_3\). Thus, we will fit a model of the form: \(y_1 = \beta_0 + \beta_1x_1 + \beta_2x_2 + \beta_3x_3 + \beta_4x_1^2 + \beta_5x_2^2 + \beta_6x_3^2 + \beta_7x_1x_2 + \beta_8x_1x_3 + \beta_9x_2x_3 + \epsilon\).
02

Fitting the Quadratic Model for \(y_1\)

Using regression analysis tools, determine the coefficients \(\beta_0\) through \(\beta_9\). After fitting, you'll obtain coefficients that best describe the variation in \(y_1\) based on \(x_1, x_2, x_3\) and their interactions.
03

Linear Model Structure for \(y_2\)

A linear model only includes the linear terms of the factors \(x_1, x_2, x_3\). Thus, it takes the form \(y_2 = \gamma_0 + \gamma_1x_1 + \gamma_2x_2 + \gamma_3x_3 + \delta\).
04

Fitting the Linear Model for \(y_2\)

Perform a linear regression with \(x_1, x_2, x_3\) as predictors for \(y_2\). This will give you the coefficients \(\gamma_0\) through \(\gamma_3\) that best describe \(y_2\).
05

Meeting Objective Conditions

To hold mean resistivity (\(y_1\)) at 500, you must adjust \(x_1, x_2, x_3\) so that the predicted value from the quadratic model equals 500. Using a method like Lagrange multipliers or trial-and-error with the model, minimize \(y_2\) at this condition. Refer to both model coefficients derived from steps 2 and 4.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Regression Analysis
Regression analysis is a fundamental technique used in statistics to understand relationships between variables. The goal is to model the relationship of a dependent variable with one or more independent variables. In our exercise, we utilize both a quadratic and a linear regression model.

For the quadratic model, the dependent variable is denoted as \(y_1\) which represents the average resistivity of a semiconductor wafer. This model seeks to capture not only the individual effects of each factor \(x_1, x_2, x_3\) but also their interactions and higher-order effects through terms like \(x_1^2\) and \(x_1x_2\). The model form is:
  • \(y_1 = \beta_0 + \beta_1x_1 + \beta_2x_2 + \beta_3x_3 + \beta_4x_1^2 + \beta_5x_2^2 + \beta_6x_3^2 + \beta_7x_1x_2 + \beta_8x_1x_3 + \beta_9x_2x_3 + \epsilon\)

By adjusting the coefficients \(\beta_0\) through \(\beta_9\), we aim to precisely describe the behavior of \(y_1\) with respect to the changes in \(x_1, x_2,\) and \(x_3\).

In contrast, the linear model applied to \(y_2\) (the standard deviation of resistivity) only considers direct effects of the input variables. Here, the form is straightforward:
  • \(y_2 = \gamma_0 + \gamma_1x_1 + \gamma_2x_2 + \gamma_3x_3 + \delta\)

These models assist in understanding how variations in \(x_1, x_2,\) and \(x_3\) can influence resistivity outcomes.
Semiconductor Manufacturing
Semiconductor manufacturing is a sophisticated process essential for producing electronic components. Understanding and controlling process parameters is crucial to ensure quality and performance of semiconductor devices. During manufacturing, factors like temperature, pressure, and chemical concentrations are carefully adjusted to achieve desired material properties like resistivity.

In the context of our exercise, resistivity measurements help determine the electrical properties of the semiconductor wafer. The controllable factors \(x_1, x_2,\) and \(x_3\) could represent variables such as the level of doping, temperature settings, and time of exposure during a specific manufacturing cycle. Each factor individually, or in combination, can significantly affect the resistivity and consistency of the wafer.

By applying a structured approach with models like quadratic and linear regression, engineers can analyze the impact of these variables and fine-tune the manufacturing process. Such optimizations lead to better product reliability and higher yield rates, ultimately making semiconductor devices more efficient and cost-effective.
Response Surface Methodology
Response Surface Methodology (RSM) is an advanced statistical approach used to optimize processes with multiple variables. It helps in understanding the relationships between several input factors and the resulting outputs. This is particularly useful in complex systems like semiconductor manufacturing where interactions between factors are common.

RSM combines design of experiments with regression analysis to build a predictive model for response variables. In our exercise, the quadratic model used for resistivity averages is an example of an RSM application. Through this model, we seek a relationship that explains how the inputs \(x_1, x_2,\) and \(x_3\) influence the output \(y_1\).


  • A key objective in applying RSM here is to identify optimal settings for \(x_1, x_2,\) and \(x_3\) that maintain the average resistivity near 500 while minimizing variation.
  • This is done by analyzing the response surface - a graphical representation of the relation between inputs and outputs.


Using RSM enables deeper insights and effective control over complex industrial processes, paving the way for enhanced product performance and process efficiency.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

An article in the Journal of Marketing Research (1973, Vol. \(10(3),\) pp. \(270-276\) ) presented a \(2^{7-4}\) fractional factorial design to conduct marketing research: $$ \begin{array}{crrrrrrrr} \hline & & & & & & & & \text { Sales for a } \\ & & & & & & & & \text { 6-Week Period } \\ \text { Runs } & \boldsymbol{A} & \boldsymbol{B} & \boldsymbol{C} & \boldsymbol{D} & \boldsymbol{E} & \boldsymbol{F} & \boldsymbol{G} & \text { (in \$1000) } \\ \hline 1 & -1 & -1 & -1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & -1 & 8.7 \\ 2 & 1 & -1 & -1 & -1 & -1 & 1 & 1 & 15.7 \\ 3 & -1 & 1 & -1 & -1 & 1 & -1 & 1 & 9.7 \\ 4 & 1 & 1 & -1 & 1 & -1 & -1 & -1 & 11.3 \\ 5 & -1 & -1 & 1 & 1 & -1 & -1 & 1 & 14.7 \\ 6 & 1 & -1 & 1 & -1 & 1 & -1 & -1 & 22.3 \\ 7 & -1 & 1 & 1 & -1 & -1 & 1 & -1 & 16.1 \\ 8 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 22.1 \end{array} $$ The factors and levels are shown in the following table. $$ \begin{array}{llll} \hline & \ {\text { Factor }} & \ {-1} & \ {+1} \\ \hline A & \begin{array}{l} \text { Television } \\ \text { advertising } \end{array} & \text { No advertising } & \text { Advertising } \\ B & \begin{array}{l} \text { Billboard } \\ \text { advertising } \end{array} & \text { No advertising } & \text { Advertising } \\ C & \begin{array}{l} \text { Newspaper } \\ \text { advertising } \end{array} & \text { No advertising } & \text { Advertising } \\ D & \begin{array}{l} \text { Candy wrapper } \\ \text { design } \end{array} & \begin{array}{l} \text { Conservative } \\ \text { design } \end{array} & \begin{array}{l} \text { Flashy } \\ \text { design } \end{array} \\ E & \text { Display design } & \begin{array}{l} \text { Normal shelf } \\ \text { display } \end{array} & \begin{array}{l} \text { Special aisle } \\ \text { display } \end{array} \\ F & \begin{array}{l} \text { Free sample } \\ \text { program } \end{array} & \begin{array}{l} \text { No free } \\ \text { samples } \end{array} & \text { Free samples } \\ G & \text { Size of candy bar } & 1 \text { oz bar } & 21 / 20 \mathrm{bar} \end{array} $$ (a) Write down the alias relationships. (b) Estimate the main effects. (c) Prepare a normal probability plot for the effects and interpret the results.

Construct a \(2^{5}\) design in four blocks. Select the appropriate effects to confound so that the highest possible interactions are confounded with blocks.

Four factors are thought to influence the taste of a soft-drink beverage: type of sweetener \((A),\) ratio of syrup to water \((B),\) carbonation level \((C),\) and temperature \((D) .\) Each factor can be run at two levels, producing a \(2^{4}\) design. At each run in the design, samples of the beverage are given to a test panel consisting of 20 people. Each tester assigns the beverage a point score from 1 to \(10 .\) Total score is the response variable, and the objective is to find a formulation that maximizes total score. Two replicates of this design are run, and the results are shown in the table. Analyze the data and draw conclusions. Use \(a=0.05\) in the statistical tests. $$ \begin{array}{ccc} \hline \ {\begin{array}{c} \text { Treatment } \\ \text { Combination } \end{array}} & {\text { Replicate }} \\ \ & \text { I } & \text { II } \\ \hline(1) & 159 & 163 \\ a & 168 & 175 \\ b & 158 & 163 \\ a b & 166 & 168 \\ c & 175 & 178 \\ a c & 179 & 183 \\ b c & 173 & 168 \\ a b c & 179 & 182 \\ d & 164 & 159 \\ a d & 187 & 189 \\ b d & 163 & 159 \\ a b d & 185 & 191 \\ c d & 168 & 174 \\ a c d & 197 & 199 \\ b c d & 170 & 174 \\ a b c d & 194 & 198 \end{array} $$

An article in Bioresource Technology ["Medium Optimization for Phenazine-1-carboxylic Acid Production by a gacA qscR Double Mutant of Pseudomonas sp. M18 Using Response Surface Methodology" (Vol. \(101(11), 2010,\) pp. \(4089-4095)]\) described an experiment to optimize culture medium factors to enhance phenazine-1-carboxylic acid (PCA) production. A \(2^{5-1}\) fractional factorial design was conducted with factors soybean meal, glucose, corn steep liquor, ethanol, and \(\mathrm{MgSO}_{4}\). Rows below the horizontal line in the table (coded with zeros) correspond to center points. (a) What is the generator of this design? (b) What is the resolution of this design? (c) Analyze factor effects and comment on important ones. (d) Develop a regression model to predict production in terms of the actual factor levels. (e) Does a residual analysis indicate any problems? $$ \begin{array}{ccccccc} \hline \text { Run } & X_{1} & X_{2} & X_{3} & X_{4} & X_{5} & \text { Production }(\mathrm{g} / \mathrm{L}) \\ \hline 1 & \- & \- & \- & \- & \+ & 1575.5 \\ 2 & \+ & \- & \- & \- & \- & 2201.4 \\ 3 & \- & \+ & \- & \- & \- & 1813.9 \\ 4 & \+ & \+ & \- & \- & \+ & 2164.1 \\ 5 & \- & \- & \+ & \- & \- & 1739.6 \\ 6 & \+ & \- & \+ & \- & \+ & 2483.2 \\ 7 & \- & \+ & \+ & \- & \+ & 2159.1 \\ 8 & \+ & \+ & \+ & \- & \- & 2257.7 \\ 9 & \- & \- & \- & \+ & \- & 1386.3 \\ 10 & \+ & \- & \- & \+ & \+ & 1967.8 \\ 11 & \- & \+ & \- & \+ & \+ & 1306.0 \\ 12 & \+ & \+ & \- & \+ & \- & 2486.9 \\ 13 & \- & \- & \+ & \+ & \+ & 2374.9 \\ 14 & \+ & \- & \+ & \+ & \- & 2932.7 \\ 15 & \- & \+ & \+ & \+ & \- & 2458.9 \\ 16 & \+ & \+ & \+ & \+ & \+ & 3204.9 \\ \hline 17 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2630.4 \\ 18 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2571.6 \\ 19 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2734.5 \\ 20 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2480.4 \\ 21 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2662.5 \end{array} $$ $$ \begin{array}{llccc} \hline \text { Variable } & \text { Component } && {\text { Levels (g/L) }} \\\ \hline & & -1 & 0 & +1 \\ X_{1} & \text { Soybean meal } & 30 & 45 & 60 \\ X_{2} & \text { Ethanol } & 12 & 18 & 24 \\ X_{3} & \text { Corn steep liquor } & 7 & 11 & 14 \\ X_{4} & \text { Glucose } & 10 & 15 & 20 \\ X_{5} & \mathrm{MgSO}_{4} & 0 & 1 & 2 \end{array} $$

An article in Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology ["A Study of Antifungal Antibiotic Production by Thermomonospora sp MTCC 3340 Using Full Factorial Design" (2003, Vol. 78, pp. \(605-610\) ) ] considered the effects of several factors on antifungal activities. The antifungal yield was expressed as Nystatin international units per \(\mathrm{cm}^{3}\). The results from carbon source concentration (glucose) and incubation temperature factors follow. See Table E14-1. (a) State the hypotheses of interest. (b) Test your hypotheses with \(\alpha=0.5\). (c) Analyze the residuals and plot the residuals versus the predicted yield. (d) Using Fisher's LSD method, compare the means of anti-fungal activity for the different carbon source concentrations. (Table)

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.