/*! 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 45 Suppose you were to conduct a tw... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Log out

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 11: Problem 45

Suppose you were to conduct a two-factor factorial experiment, factor A at four levels and factor \(\mathrm{B}\) at five levels, with three replications per treatment. a. How many treatments are involved in the experiment? b. How many observations are involved? c. List the sources of variation and their respective degrees of freedom.

Short Answer

Expert verified
So, the total number of treatments in the experiment is 4 x 5 = 20 treatments.

Step by step solution

01

a. Number of treatments

In a two-factor factorial experiment, the total number of treatments (combinations of factor levels) is the product of the number of levels of both factors. For factor A with 4 levels and factor B with 5 levels, there are (4 levels in A) x (5 levels in B) treatments.

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 91影视!

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 experiment was conducted to compare the effects of four different chemicals, \(\mathrm{A}, \mathrm{B}, \mathrm{C},\) and \(\mathrm{D},\) in producing water resistance in textiles. A strip of material, randomly selected from a bolt, was cut into four pieces, and the four pieces were randomly assigned to receive one of the four chemicals, \(\mathrm{A}, \mathrm{B}, \mathrm{C},\) or \(\mathrm{D} .\) This process was replicated three times, thus producing a randomized block design. The design, with moistureresistance measurements, is as shown in the figure (low readings indicate low moisture penetration). Analyze the experiment using a method appropriate for this randomized block design. Identify the blocks and treatments, and investigate any possible differences in treatment means. If any differences exist, use an appropriate method to specifically identify where the differences lie. What are the practical implications for the chemical producers? Has blocking been effective in this experiment? Present your results in the form of a report. $$$ \begin{aligned} &\text { Blocks (bolt samples) }\\\ &\begin{array}{|c|c|c|} \hline 1 & 2 & 3 \\ \hline \mathrm{C} & \mathrm{D} & \mathrm{B} \\ 9.9 & 13.4 & 12.7 \\ \mathrm{A} & \mathrm{B} & \mathrm{D} \\ 10.1 & 12.9 & 12.9 \\ \mathrm{B} & \mathrm{A} & \mathrm{C} \\ 11.4 & 12.2 & 11.4 \\ \mathrm{D}_{2} & \mathrm{C} & \mathrm{A} \\ 12.1 & 12.3 & 11.9 \end{array} \end{aligned} $$

An article in Archaeometry involved an analysis of 26 samples of Romano- British pottery, found at four different kiln sites in the United Kingdom. \(^{9}\) Since one site only yielded two samples, consider the samples found at the other three sites. The samples were analyzed to determine their chemical composition and the percentage of iron oxide is shown below. a. What type of experimental design is this? b. Use an analysis of variance to determine if there is a difference in the average percentage of iron oxide at the three sites. Use \(\alpha=.01\). c. If you have access to a computer program, generate the diagnostic plots for this experiment. Does it appear that any of the analysis of variance assumptions have been violated? Explain.

The analysis of variance \(F\) -test in Exercise 11.17 (and data set EX 1117 ) determined that there was indeed a difference in the average cost of lumber for the four states. The following information from Exercise 11.17 is given in the table: $$ \begin{array}{ll|lr} \hline \text { Sample Means } & \bar{x}_{1}=242.2 & \text { MSE } & 41.25 \\ & \bar{x}_{2}=214.8 & \text { Error } d f: & 16 \\ & \bar{x}_{3}=231.6 & n_{i}: & 5 \\ & \bar{x}_{4}=248.6 & k: & 4 \\ \hline \end{array} $$ Use Tukey's method for paired comparisons to determine which means differ significantly from the others at the \(\alpha=.01\) level.

A study was conducted to determine the effect of two factors on terrain visualization training for soldiers. \({ }^{4}\) During the training programs, participants viewed contour maps of various terrains and then were permitted to view a computer reconstruction of the terrain as it would appear from a specified angle. The two factors investigated in the experiment were the participants' spatial abilities (abilities to visualize in three dimensions) and the viewing procedures (active or passive). Active participation permitted participants to view the computer-generated reconstructions of the terrain from any and all angles. Passive participation gave the participants a set of preselected reconstructions of the terrain. Participants were tested according to spatial ability, and from the test scores 20 were categorized as possessing high spatial ability, 20 medium, and 20 low. Then 10 participants within each of these groups were assigned to each of the two training modes, active or passive. The accompanying tables are the ANOVA table computed the researchers and the table of the treatment means. $$ \begin{array}{lcc} & {\text { Training Condition }} \\ \hline \text { Spatial Ability } & \text { Active } & \text { Passive } \\ \hline \text { High } & 17.895 & 9.508 \\ \text { Medium } & 5.031 & 5.648 \\ \text { Low } & 1.728 & 1.610 \\ \hline \end{array} $$ a. Explain how the authors arrived at the degrees of freedom shown in the ANOVA table. b. Are the \(F\) -values correct? c. Interpret the test results. What are their practical implications? d. Use Table 6 in Appendix I to approximate the \(p\) values for the \(F\) statistics shown in the ANOVAtable.

Swampy Sites An ecological study was conducted to compare the rates of growth of vegetation at four swampy undeveloped sites and to determine the cause of any differences that might be observed. Part of the study involved measuring the leaf lengths of a particular plant species on a preselected date in May. Six plants were randomly selected at each of the four sites to be used in the comparison. The data in the table are the mean leaf length per plant (in centimeters) for a random sample of ten leaves per plant. The MINITAB analysis of variance computer printout for these data is also provided. $$ \begin{array}{lllllll} \text { Location } & {\text { Mean Leaf Length (cm) }} \\ \hline 1 && 5.7 & 6.3 & 6.1 & 6.0 & 5.8 & 6.2 \\ 2 && 6.2 & 5.3 & 5.7 & 6.0 & 5.2 & 5.5 \\ 3 && 5.4 & 5.0 & 6.0 & 5.6 & 4.9 & 5.2 \\ 4 && 3.7 & 3.2 & 3.9 & 4.0 & 3.5 & 3.6 \end{array} $$ a. You will recall that the test and estimation procedures for an analysis of variance require that the observations be selected from normally distributed (at least, roughly so) populations. Why might you feel reasonably confident that your data satisfy this assumption? b. Do the data provide sufficient evidence to indicate a difference in mean leaf length among the four locations? What is the \(p\) -value for the test? c. Suppose, prior to seeing the data, you decided to compare the mean leaf lengths of locations 1 and \(4 .\) Test the null hypothesis \(\mu_{1}=\mu_{4}\) against the alternative \(\mu_{1} \neq \mu_{4}\) d. Refer to part c. Construct a \(99 \%\) confidence interval for \(\left(\mu_{1}-\mu_{4}\right)\) e. Rather than use an analysis of variance \(F\) -test, it would seem simpler to examine one's data, select the two locations that have the smallest and largest sample mean lengths, and then compare these two means using a Student's \(t\) -test. If there is evidence to indicate a difference in these means, there is clearly evidence of a difference among the four. (If you were to use this logic, there would be no need for the analysis of variance \(F\) -test.) Explain why this procedure is invalid.
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

Theoretical and Mathematical Physics

Read Explanation

Logic and Functions

Read Explanation

Pure Maths

Read Explanation

Decision Maths

Read Explanation

Probability and Statistics

Read Explanation

Geometry

Read Explanation
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.