Paper detail

Design choice and machine learning model performances

An increasing number of publications present the joint application of Design of Experiments (DOE) and machine learning (ML) as a methodology to collect and analyze data on a specific industrial phenomenon. However, the literature shows that the choice of the design for data collection and model for data analysis is often not driven by statistical or algorithmic advantages, thus there is a lack of studies which provide guidelines on what designs and ML models to jointly use for data collection and analysis. This article discusses the choice of design in relation to the ML model performances. A study is conducted that considers 12 experimental designs, 7 families of predictive models, 7 test functions that emulate physical processes, and 8 noise settings, both homoscedastic and heteroscedastic. The results of the research can have an immediate impact on the work of practitioners, providing guidelines for practical applications of DOE and ML.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.