This article was downloaded by: [USP University of Sao Paulo]

On: 26 February 2013, At: 14:52

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Quality Engineering
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lqen20

METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A

SURVEY, COMPARISON, AND FUTURE PREDICTIONS
a a
Kiang-Meng Tay & Clive Butler
a
Department of Manufacturing and Engineering Systems, Brunei University, Uxbridge, UB8
3PH, United Kingdom
Version of record first published: 19 Oct 2007.

To cite this article: Kiang-Meng Tay & Clive Butler (1999): METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A SURVEY,
COMPARISON, AND FUTURE PREDICTIONS, Quality Engineering, 11:3, 343-356

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08982119908919250

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Quality Engineering, 11(3), 34S356 (1999)

METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:

A SURVEY, COMPARISON, AND FUTURE PREDICTIONS
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013

Kiang-Meng Tay and Clive Butler

Department of Manufacturing and Engineering Systems
Brunel University
Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom

Key Words variable and gain an understanding of the relation-

Design of experiments; Neural networks; Taguchi meth-
ods; Classical techniques; Quality engineering.
Introduction
In many systems and processes of manufacturing engi-
neering, the boundary conditions and physical phenomena
are so complex that it is beyond the present technical capa-
bility to obtain satisfactory analytical or numerical models.
As such, experimentation is necessary to define the behav-
ior of the system andlor processes. Design of experiments
(experimental design) can be defined as a systematic attempt
to construct theories that correlate wide groups of observed
facts through the purposeful changes of the inputs (factors)
to a process in order to observe the corresponding changes
in the outputs (responses). Experimental design is a scien-
tific approach which allows the researcher to better under-
stand a process and to determine how the inputs affect the
response. The fundamental concept of experimental design
is illustrated in Figure 1.
The advantages of using design of experiments in an
industrial environment can be summarized as follows:
1. Simultaneous optimization of several factors can be
studied at the same time, making it possible to gain
insight into their simultaneous effect on the response
ship between the input factors and the response and
interaction effects among the various parameters,
with only a small amount of experimental data.
Rapid data collection and decision making because
the number of observations needed to make a deci-
sion can be minimized, thus reducing costs associ-
-
ated with the investigation. andinteractions between
variables can be detected and determined.
Build a mathematical model relating the response to
the input factors, which is often referred to as pro-
cess/product characterization. This can be used to
determine and quantify the settings of the input fac-
tors that optimize the response. Experimental errors
can be estimated and conclusions can be drawn us-
ing knowledge gained and this is useful information
for determining sample sizes for follow-up studies.
Historical Perspectives of Experimental Designs
A survey of the historical perspective timeline on the
existing methodologies of experimental designs is shown in
Figure 2.
Design of experiments originated from Fisher in England
in the 1930s (1). Fisher (2,2a) showed that a full-factorial
array could be reduced to a smaller but still statistically
meaningful set by using arrays called fractional factorial de-

Copyright 0 1999 by Marcel Dekker, Inc.


Control Parameters
T identify the setting of the product and process pa-
Input x System Output y
Nolse Factors
Figure I . Conceptual framework of experimental design.
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
signs (3). Since then, it has been further developed by many
researchers represented more notably by Genichi Taguchi,
George E. P. Box, William G. Hunter, J. Stuart Hunter, and
many others who also authored a seminal work. They de-
veloped Fisher's ideas into empirical and mechanistic
model-building techniques with the use of factorial and frac-
tional factorial designs. Fisher, Taguchi, Box, and others
who provided statistical tools for quality engineering have
played pioneering roles in the technical and engineering
environment, especially in the arenas of experimental de-
sign.
Tnguchi used and promoted statistical techniques for
quality from an engineer's perspective rather than that of a
statisticinn. To date, Taguchi methods have been applied
widely in many disciplines (1,4-7) and have been used
widely as an approach to multidisciplinary design optimi-
zation in many industries (8-1 lb).
Taguchi offers more than techniques of experimental
design and analysis. He has a complete and integrated sys-
tem to develop specifications, engineer the design to the
specifications, and manufacture the product to specifica-
tions. The basic element of Taguchi's quality philosophy
can be summarized as follows:
I. The customer's loss due to a product's performance
variation is often approximately proportional to the
square of the deviations of the performance charac-
teristic from its target value.
2. The final quality and cost of a manufactured prod-
uct are determined to a large extent by the engineer-
ing designs of the product and its manufacturing
process. A product's or process' performance varia-
tion can be reduced by exploiting the nonlinear ef-
fects of the product or process parameters on the
performance characteristics.
TAY AND BUTLER
3. Statistically planned experiments can be used to
rameters that reduce performance variation. Change
the experimental procedures from varying one fac-
tor at a time to many factors at a time.
4. Change the objectives of the experiments and the
definition of quality from "achieving conformance
to specifications" to "achieving the target and mini-
mizing the variability."
There are two basic types of design of experiments meth-
odology in use today; namely:
Classical Techniques: Classical design of experiments
techniques developed in the United States of America
and the United Kingdom (Fisher) from the 1920s and
1930s, which include full-factorial designs, fractional
factorial designs, central composite designs, and D-
optimal design and response surface design. For de-
tailed discussion, see Refs. 3 and 12.
Taguchi Method: Taguchi design of experiments meth-
ods (orthogonal array) developed by Taguchi in Japan
from the 1950s and 1960s. The original work of
Taguchi is documented in his own two-volume book
(8). Other books which present the Taguchi method
in considerable detail are those of Taguchi and Wu
(13), Ross (l4), Kackar (IS), Hunter (l6), Ranjit ( 9 ,
Montgomery (17), Taguchi and Konishi (IS), and
Taguchi and Phadke (19).
Both types have their proponents and opponents, and
sometimes the discussions between the two have been less
than uplifting (20). Fortunately, industrial and scientific
institutions have come to realize that it is more productive
to use experimental design than to argue about how to use
it, and the controversy has been relegated to some univer-
sity statistics departments. Much of the recent theoretical
work has been directed toward accommodations of the two
methods and developing the best features of both.
C o m p a r i s o n of Classical a n d Taguchi M e t h o d s
Both classical and Taguchi methods have their strengths
and weaknesses, and both have distinct areas of profitable
application. Some points of comparison are discussed here.
From the literature review. it was found that the techniaues
propounded by the classical and Taguchi schools are by no
means mutually exclusive. A clearer understanding of both
can be gained by means of a presentation as illustrated in
Figure 3.
 METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

' Regression / 1-tat Hypothesis \

830 Concepts llYU
Testing
Formalized
(Galton & Pcarson) (Gosra)

1812
\ 888
/ 1933
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013

(Bunnm) (Yates)
13
1946 Burman designs ) 1931 randomized
block designs
(Plakut-Bunnan) (Fisha) (Yates)

1Y4> IY>6

Multiple RSM f Box-Behnkm

Regression EVOP designs

(Box-Bchnkm)

\
(Box)

1Y>1
Half Normal
lYbu
f 2 k R~ a c t i m ~ ~
Fklorials
Plots Rwlution
(C. Daniel) (Box & Hunta)
\ Y>Y
1 lYbl
/

/ Residuals to
find variance Oplimal deign
reducing fwtw
. P P ~
(Pdamv)
f D-optimal
blocking techniques IYIZ
& Robust designs
(Cox 4 Nachtsheim)
\ 89

Figure 2. A survey of experimental design methodologies.

 TAY AND BUTLER

Tapuchi Methods Classical Techniques

Sequential experimentation
Screening/characlerirorion
Randomization and Replication
Complete confounding anolysis
On-line/Off-line QC Orthogonal designs t-Tesl for hvo-level factors
Quali~yand Reliabili~yby design Curvature lesls
Cost effective product and process Mathematical modelling
~ ' o n t r oPoramelers
l /Noise parameters A l t e r ~ t i v eLotin square conrlruclions
Analysis of variance
Model validiry checking
Tests of signl@cance
Description. Prediction & Control
Inner/Ouler array optjmaliry (RSMJ
Signol/Noise ratio Optimaliry tracking (EVOP)
Marginal analysir Placktl-Burman Designs
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013

Accumulation analysis Bar-Behnken Designs

Central Composite Design

Figure 3. Venn diagram of classical and Taguchi methodologies.

From the literature review, a comparison of the classical
and Taguchi approaches to experimental designs can be
summarized in Table 1.
The classical methods are more rigorous mathematically
and statistically than Taguchi methods. Most texts on clas-
sical methods spend a great deal of time and effort on con-
founding and interaction of factors. On the other hand,
Taguchi methods emphasize the evaluation of a large num-
ber of main effects, rather than interactions. Thus, the clas-
sical methods include more hypothesis testing and statisti-
cal inference methods than Taguchi methods. In classical
methods, considerable emphasis is placed on understanding
the distribution of the data and using calculation methods
appropriate to the distribution. The Taguchi method oper-
ates on the premise that no data fit any distribution exactly
and takes a much more casual approach to this consider-
ation. The classical methods emphasize the choice of opti-
mum results by calculation of response surfaces from a
single, large experiment. On the other hand, Taguchi meth-
ods emphasize collecting data quickly and efficiently and
iterating the experiment several times if necessary. This is
sometimes called "Pick the Winner" statistics. In addition,
cost is an ever-present consideration in Taguchi experi-
ments; it is not unusual for the levels of some factors to be

Table I. Comparison of Classical and Taguchi Approaches

CLASSICAL TECHNIQUES
(n) Formulntc problem and define the objectives.
(b) Advancc an hypothesis to explain the problem.
Choosc criteria measures.
(c) Conduct brainstorming session to determine the
vnrinblcs to study; define range and appropriate factor levels.
(d) Dctcrminc desired levels of producer risk (alpha risk-
crror of rejecting true hypothesis) and consumer risk
(bcfn risk--error of accepting false hypothesis) in order
to cstimnte the appropriate sample size to measure effects.
TAGUCHI METHODS
(a) Define the problem with a clear statement and aim to achieve.
(b) Determine the objectives by identifying the output
characteristics to be studied and optimized.
(c) Conduct brainstorming session to determine the controllable
and uncontrollable factors; define range and appropriate factor
levels.
(d) Discussion about desired levels of alpha risk and beta risk
normally not addressed. Sample size, n, is found based on
the number of effects to be tested and the number of levels
of each factor. Little guidance is provided on the numbering
of replicates.
(continued)
 METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Table I.
CLASSICAL TECHNIQUES
(e) Select an appropriate classical statistical design and test
statistic. Effects to be tested typically include main and two-
way interaction effects.
(f) Build an orthogonal design (usually Resolution IV or
Resolution V) to satisfy the objectives.
(g) Randomize the order of the runs to spread all unmeasured
noise factors evenly across the other effects. This step
ensures internal validity of the experiment and allows for
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
causality analysis. Classical experiments will still be concerned
about factors which were not included due to incomplete
brainstorming or inability to be measured.
(h) Run the experiment and collect the data.
(i) Perform hypothesis tests on all desired effects and classify
as significant or not significant using the t-tests and F-tests. Use
replication at some or all points to estimate error and/or
pool higher-order interaction sums of squares for the error.
Recent emphasis is on the use of Normal probability
plots or Pareto charts for unreplicated designs.
(i) Involve building a parsimonious mathematical model to form
prediction intervals and estimate the optimal response through
the use of Response Surface Methodology.
(k) Find the optimal through an iterative experimental procedure
If the optimal response lies outside the sample region,
conduct another experiment in the direction of the optimal.
(I) Set the process factors at the optimal settings and go
on-line. Recent emphasis is also on confirmation runs.
(m) Assumptions include normality, independence, and
equal variability. The F-test is robust to minor violations
of normality and homogeneity, especially for large
samples balanced for each experimental condition.
Emphasis is on blending engineering knowledge, common
sense, and statistics when drawing conclusions.
(n) Conclusion and recommendations and implementation.
The Classical methods are generally preferred by those with a
statistical or mathematical inclination.
Continued
TAGUCHI METHODS
(e) Design the experiment by selecting the appropriate orthogonal
arrays by assigning the controllable factors and their interactions
to a column of the inner array and the noise factors to the outer
array. The effects to be tested usually consist of only main
effects. Taguchi methods can incorporate two-way interactions,
but priority is given to main effects for simplicity.
(f) Orthogonal designs are tabled and because of deemphasis
of interactions are usually of Resolution 111.
(g) Randomization is deemphasized, making the experiment
vulnerable to confounding of unsuspected noise factors and
design modification that incorporates information about
potential noise factors. Taguchi does not emphasize the use
of randomization, but attempts to compensate for it by
incorporating noise in the design. Taguchi, therefore, advocated
the use of a noise (outer) array to systematically vary the
noise factors; the noise factor is crossed with the controllable
(inner) array, and the product array is used for the
experimentation.
(h) Conduct the experiment by performing the experimental trials
and collect the experimental data.
(i) Hypothesis tests are not emphasized; instead, a graphical
analysis is conducted or the signal-to-noise ratio is used.
If ANOVA is conducted, the error estimate is based on
the pooling of insignificant sums of squares. Rules for pooling
for sums of squares are not rigorous. F-values are tested
for significance per classical procedures; however, it is
recommended that final unpooled F-ratios greater than 2 not
be ignored.
(i) The important effects are determined graphically to select
an experimental champion based on the best mean or largest
signal-to-noise ratio. Prediction equations are generated and
used for prediction.
(k) No iterative experimentation is used. The settings for the
best response over the experimental region are based on
signal-to-noise ratio.
(I) Run a confirmatory experiment with the new parameter
settings to verify the predicted results. Additional experiments
are required if the results are unsatisfactory. The imponancc of
confirmation runs is stressed. Confirmatory runs are made
prior to going on-line.
(m) Assumptions are similar to the classical method.
Independence may be a problem due to lack of randomization.
Unequal variance is accounted for by the transformation used
in signal-to-noise calculations.
(n) Conclusion and recommendations and implementation.
Taguchi methods are more popular with the engineer because of
their practicality.

selected purely on the basis of cost. Although classical
methods are capable of evaluating costs, this consideration
is usually not as prominent in reporting of results.
The contribution of uncontrollable factors is of consid-
erable concern in Taguchi experiments. In order to minimize
the experimentaleffort, it is important that noise factors that
contribute substantially to the variation are included in the
study. In fact, the consideration of these factors in outer
arrays is a major part of Taguchi methods. By contrast, clas-
sical methods are more concerned with controllable factors.
Based on the above points, it may be obvious to the reader
that the two types of experimental design have different
spheres of application, albeit with significant overlap. In
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
general, classical design of experiments is preferred in ap-
plications where the cost of the experiment is high, or where
the time required is long and options for iteration are lim-
ited, or where a precise and rigorous result is required, or
where uncontrollable factors can be limited, or where the
emphasis is on the results obtained, rather than on the pro-
cess knowledge to be gained by conducting several itera-
tions. Examples of such applications are space shuttle ex-
periments, medical experiments, and basic research projects.
Taguchi methods are more applicable where there are many
uncontrollable factors, where it is important for the experi-
menter to obtain results quickly, and where it is possible to
iterate the experiment several times. The most important
contributions of the Taguchi approach are in the area of
quality philosophy and engineering methodology, which
include the loss function and robust designs.
Critique of Classical and Taguchi Methods
Although Taguchi's methods have gained widespread
application in industry, they have been subjected to consid-
erable critical review. Some researchers and practitioners
have severely criticized his statistical methods (9,15,17,20-
23). Most of these criticisms focus on the mathematical and
statistical rigor of his data analysis approach. Several recent
research papers have shown that Taguchi's methods for data
analysis and optimization are sometimes unnecessarily com-
plicated and limited. A few references are by Box (24). Nair
and Pregibon (25), Kusaba (26), Box and Jones (27),
Logothetis (28), Bisgaard (29), and Box et al. (20); the lat-
ter reference provides a comprehensive overview.
Experimental Optimizalion
It is quite clear that many engineering systems are non-
linear, and nonlinearity cannot be determined by two-level
TAY AND BUTLER
factorial experiments. This is why Taguchi often resorts to
using mixed-level factorial experiments. However, although
many engineering systems can be expected to exhibit
nonlinearity, the classical school of thought finds it ill-ad-
vised and quite uneconomical to worry about curvature in
the initial phase. Instead, the classical techniques use two-
level designs in the first experiment and only worry about
second-order effects and curvature when they show them-
selves through the data, not just suspecting that the system
might exhibit second-order effects globally.
Taguchi favors the use of mixed-level orthogonal arrays
with an economic run size. Taguchi's main reason for us-
ing mixed-level orthogonal arrays with an economic run size
is the run-size economy. Several methods have been pro-
posed in the combinatorial design literature for construct-
ing mixed-level arrays, but the emphasis is not on run-size
economy. For any combinatorial work to make impact in
industrial applications, this and other practical constraints
cannot be overlooked. Unlike classical designs, whose ef-
fects are either orthogonal or fully aliased, these arrays
(mixed-level orthogonal arrays) have more complex aliasing
patterns. The traditional approach is to use them for screen-
ing only.
However, the classical school of thought argued that it
is not advisable to start with mixed-level designs because
the appropriate spacing between the high and low levels of
the factors are seldom known. It is better, therefore, to "feel
out" the system first with a small, two-level screening ex-
periment instead of launching an ambitious experiment such
as a three-level factorial. This avoids committing a large
amount of the experimental budget to the first phase, when
the uncertainty is the greatest. A counterargument, advanced
in defense of Taguchi's approach, is that the experimenter
usually knows enough initially to space the points appropri-
ately and plan an'experiment that covers the relevant region.
Therefore, three-level designs can be used initially to esti-
mate curvature.
Data Analysis
Statisticians often insist that an experiment without de-
riving interaction is meaningless and may result in serious
errors (24,30). Many criticized the fact that Taguchi meth-
ods ignored interaction (9,15,22,23); some said that his
methods are rough cuts and do not work at the refinement
stage because all interactions must be known at this stage.
A few even indicated that Taguchi shortcut problem screen-
ing methods are more useful for research and development
(i.e., product or process development) rather than fine-
tuning discrete pan manufacture.
 METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Others, Kackar (15), Hamada and Wu (31), and Hunter
(16), emphasize the importance of interactions. A further
few stated that the universal use of signal-to-noise ratios for
choice of criteria is unconvincing and suggested the use of
data transformation as a better alternative to Taguchi's sig-
nal-to-noise ratios (24). On the contrary, Taguchi considered
it to be quite important. There is, therefore, a large gap
between the statisticians and Taguchi (engineers) followers
when it comes to the use of interactions that cannot be ig-
nored.
Statisticians treated interaction as follows:
1. Interaction among factors is considered to be an ef-
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
fective component.
2. The orthogonal array that can separate main and in-
teraction effects is used as a partial application of the
full-factorial method, or the multifactor layout itself
is used.
Therefore, if the interaction among factors is an effective
component, it is necessary to use the multifactor full-facto-
rial design, which picks up all interactions. This means that
the orthogonal arrays cannot be used because they single out
interactions among particular factors only. This would re-
quire a large number of experiments to be run and it is not
practical.
On the other hand, Taguchi's (engineers) view on this
issue is different, by treating interaction as follows:
1. Even if the effective interactions exist among param-
eters, the number of experiments necessary to iden-
tify it exceeds the number of experiments that can
be performed in practice (quite impossible to iden-
tify interaction among parameters). Thus, because
the effect cannot be identified as an unexpected ef-
fect or uncontrollable effect, interaction is treated as
a noise or unknown component.
2. Even if the interaction among certain parameters is
identified, the engineer cannot control interaction
directly. Thus, interaction should be included in the
noise effect. In other words, the treatment of inter-
action is based on the possibility of direct control.
3. In order to check the robustness (stability) of the
main effect of the assigned parameters and the re-
producibility of experimental results downstream,
interaction among parameters is forced to become
confounded with the main effect. In other words,
utilize interaction among parameters to check main
effect stability through the use of L,,,L,,, and L,,.
4. Interaction between control and noise parameters is
used to improve the signal-to-noise ratio by using
inner and outer orthogonal arrays.
From this and other statements made elsewhere, Taguchi
seems to believe that estimated main effects are not affected
by interactions because they are smeared or evenly spread
all across the design matrix column. From the preceding
discussion, it can be concluded that Taguchi engineers are
far better at using and treating interaction compared to stat-
isticians. This is because Taguchi engineers can understand
and comprehend the limitations on an experimental design
and treat a situation in a practical manner in an actual prob-
lem environment. Moreover, even if there were an ideal way
of treating interactions, it cannot be used in practice when
interactions remain unidentified. The difference in attitude
toward interaction comes from experience in the actual
problem environment. It is expected that a more positive
suggestion for design efficiency improvement based on a
bird's-eye perspective will come from the statistician.
Future Predictions on Experimental Design
Methods
The reason why many manufacturing industries failed to
use statistical design of experiments at all is because, first,
the understanding and application of design of experiments
is difficult (especially on data analysis) because of the in-
herent complexity of the tools and methods. Second, the
statisticians who design experiments with scientists and
engineers (the "experimenters") usually have to bridge a gap
in knowledge and experience. Third, there is usually a lack
of experimental planning and management procedure guid-
ance (2 1). These issues indicate that there is a need to shape
the experimental design methodology to develop the infor-
mation necessary for good planning, design, and analysis.
Alternative Experimental Design Methods
There have been many attempts to integrate Taguchi's
parameter-design principles with well-established statistical
techniques (32). Several authors have advocated treating
noise factors (which are fixed during parameter-design ex-
periments) as design factors, using a single design matrix,
and modeling the response directly as a function of the
control and noise factors. Other authors, including Vining
and Myers (33), have sought to combine Taguchi's param-
eter-design principles with conventional response surface
methodology. The design and analysis strategy introduced
by Welch et al. (34) implemented Taguchi's parameter-
design objective using more efficient, domestically devel-

oped techniques. They used response surface methodology
(RSM) to model the response directly as a function of con-
trol and noise factors.
Other related approaches were discussed by Khuri and
Cornell ( 3 3 , Montgomery (17), and Logothetis and Haigh
(36). Although the response-model approach is promising,
the methodology for carrying it out is yet to mature. As the
estimates of variance are based on the fitted-response model,
it is important that the model predicts well. In addition,
decisions on control parameter settings have to be carefully
selected because they can be very sensitive to the response
model. The response-model approach requires a parsimoni-
ous model with good prediction capability. In order to at-
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
tain this, it is important to use available physical knowledge
in the modeling process.
Multiple-Response Experimental Design Methods
The design and analysis of multiple-response experi-
ments has received little attention in the statistical literature.
The development of multiple-response analysis has been
lagging in comparison to single-response analysis. This
contrasts sharply with the growing need in science and in-
dustry to analyze multiple-response data. This can be attrib-
uted to several factors. First, the subject area is fairly new
(only in the last two decades). Second, the software needed
for analyzing multiple-response data is practically nonexist-
ent. With recent advances in modern technologies, it is
common to obtain data which describe different facets of a
system or a product. Therefore, it is imperative that practi-
cal multiresponse techniques be made available to research-
ers and data analysts.
The multiresponse optimization is one area that clearly
has many useful applications, such as in product and pro-
cess development. The problem of multiresponse optimiza-
tion has remained poorly defined for quite some time. For
multiresponse data analysis, very little is known about the
statistical properties (37-40). Furthermore, the tests of hy-
potheses concerning estimable linear functions of the param-
eters for the multiple-design multivariate linear model are
difficult to understand (41). Also, all these multivariate sta-
tistics were meant only for the statistician to understand.
There are no known diagnostic procedures that can help the
user determine the adequacy of the fitted multiresponse
model and/or detect failures of the model (42,43). Most of
the known multiresponse design criteria are variance related,
relying mainly on D-optimality. The acute shortage of soft-
ware is critical, and unless this problem is resolved, the
engineer (unfortunately) will not be attracted to
multiresponse techniques. A serious effort should therefore
TAY AND BUTLER
be made to alleviate the problem. A potential solution to
these problems is the use of artificial neural networks, which
will be described in the subsequent sections of this article.
Computer-Aided Experimental Designs
A faster and less costly approach to experimental design
is computer-aided design of experiments. It saves the engi-
neer valuable time in modeling, calculations, and analysis
of results. Computer-aided designs of experiments have
been developed that automatically perform many of the cal-
culations and manipulations required. The highly detailed
graphic displays provide an easy-to-understand picture of
exactly how a process or system performs. There is little
doubt that the trend to produce computer software that
guides users through the process of experimental design and
analysis will accelerate. Even now, the major problem con-
fronting developers of such systems is not computer or tech-
nical related, but instead involves understanding how the
intelligence should behave.
At present, most commercially available experimental
design programs are little more than catalogs of standard
designs presented in a logical sequence (44-49). Although
this is useful, it hardly explores the full capability of an
expert design system. The reason for the failure is obvious:
It is an extremely difficult task. Developers of expert sys-
tems face the challenge of how to integrate successfully the
users' existing subject-matter knowledge and experience
with the technical capabilities embodied in the software.
Ordinarily, a consultant or practitioner designs an experi-
ment using an informal analytical process. Because expert
systems require more formalism, their development will lead
to a deeper examination of all aspects of the design process.
Quality engineers can look forward to the fruits of this
development: intelligent statistical design software that sim-
plifies and extends the application of experimental design.
This application should yield quantum breakthroughs in
quality, cost, and development cycle time.
Recently many companies have begun to realize the
potential of computers in quality control. This has been due
primarily to the need to react to competitive pressures and
the introduction of automation. Although the last 5 years has
witnessed an explosion in the number of commercial soft-
ware packages available for quality control and design of
experiments, minimal emphasis has been placed on the
development of expert systems for planning experiments.
Design of experiments software for exploratory data
analysis allows engineers to use statistics without a deep
knowledge of statistics by using menu prompts, copy-and-
paste text and graphics, mouse-cursor interaction, and vi-
 METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
sual patterns rather than numerical outputs to highlight dif-
ferences. Current design of experiment software packages
help engineers through the problem definition process by
prompting for the critical factors that are part of the process
under investigation. The software then makes recommenda-
tions about which experiment would be appropriate to run
and how many runs would be required while accounting for
variation of all process parameters from one experimental
run to another. These experiments include fractional facto-
rial, orthogonal array, mixture designs, Taguchi, and re-
sponse surface methodology, and so forth. The software
then generates a software listing for each test run and space
to enter test results. The software then analyzes these results
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
using standard analytical tools such as linear regression,
least square fitting, and so on. The use of common com-
puter-based experimental design (e.g., SAS, P-STAT, SPSS,
etc. statistical analysis system) has reduced the possibility
of numerical errors in statistical analysis.
However, most existing software is poor at handling
special technical features, such as nesting, components of
variance, split-plotting, and so forth, and the art of experi-
mental design. In addition, very few of the available systems
can detect methodological selection errors, because they
contain neither meta-knowledge on statistical concepts nor
knowledge on statistical methods, design of the current
experiment, primary goal of the analysis, or prior analyses
computed on the current set of data. The statistical results,
in spite of their numerical correctness, are often semantically
wrong because of the wealth of methods available in mod-
em statistical analysis computer-based systems, which of-
ten leads to erroneous application of statistical methods.
In addition, literature on the theoretical aspects of statis-
tical models are based on assumptions that are not realistic
for many applications. As long as these software were used
exclusively by statisticians, the absence of knowledge to
guide the user in selecting the method and interpreting
results did not cause serious problems. However, these soft-
ware are used more frequently by experimenters with little
statistical expertise. Thus, automating the expertise of en-
gineers and statisticians in the form of expert systems is one
potential solution.
Unfortunately, as in many other areas where intelligent
systems have been investigated, none of them have been
accepted mainly because knowledge acquisition and appli-
cation proved to be too difficult and time-consuming. In
addition, both structured and unstructured knowledge has to
be taken into consideration, and these different types of
knowledge call for different methods of representations. For
the future, design of experiments will need an intelligent
35 1
system derived from both data and domain knowledge. - In
complex design and analysis problems involving non-
linearities, more advanced methods such as artificial neural
networks are needed for data analysis.
Using Neural Networks for Experimental Designs
The advances in computer technology allow the devel-
opment of useful neural networks in a wide variety of ap-
plications, ranging from classification and pattern recogni-
tion to optimization, to function approximation and
continuous mappings and control. Similarly, the advances
in computer technology can be expected to totally transform
quality aspects of both product development and manufac-
turing processes. With the increasing pressures on manufac-
turers to improve quality, computer-integrated quality engi-
neering is going to be an essential tool in achieving
improvements in quality and productivity performance.
The future will be one in which decisions are made us-
ing advanced computers, which possess more complex ca-
pabilities using artificial neural networks and fuzzy systems,
machine learning, and so forth. The software will be domi-
nated by decision strategies, which maintain complete con-
trol over the ongoing real-time process. In the recent years,
interest in application of artificial intelligence in the prac-
tice of statistics has mushroomed. Much of the interest has
focused on the construction of intelligent software for the
analysis of data and the feasibility of building expert sys-
tems that would enable the relative novice to cany out ap-
propriate experimental analysis.
One way the technology of neural networks can impact
the concept of experimental design and decision support
system is by extending the conventional design of experi-
ments (DOE) system into an intelligent system which is
capable of handling ill-structured or unstructured problems.
These systems are incorporated with the human expert judg-
ment and preferences. Here, artificial intelligence, neural
networks, and other adaptive systems techniques can be
applied to automate the generation of decisions or strategies
for design of industrial experiments. Hence, the main im-
provement over the conventional DOE systems can be used
for the following:
I. Assist engineers and managers in their decision pro-
cesses with data information analysis capabilities
such as sensitivity analysis, hypothesis testing, pre-
dictive learning, inverse modeling, and so forth.
2. Incorporate judgment, preference, and expert knowl-
edge in the systems models to improve the quality
of decision, as the decision support system so de-
 TAY AND BUTLER

Simulation

Neuronal 1
model
I
Neural 1
Neuronal
information
processing
e.g.
Pattern recognition

Network Application 4 Control

biology 4'
Optimization
4
1
Hardware
implementation

Figure 4. Neural networks research.

Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013

signed draws on the experience and knowledge of ing unit is the weighted sum of all its inputs, with weights
not just the user but many other users and experts being the connection strengths. These weights are trans-
Improve the effectiveness of decision-making while formed further by a nonlinear transformation function
not sacrificing efficiency unnecessarily (84-94).
Capture and extract information from data, which Unfortunately, some major problems in neural networks
may arise from experimental design, historical data, remain unsolved. These include the problem that the struc-
simulation data, or observational data surveys and ture of normal neural networks, especially the hidden layers
may include judgment of not just one expert, but of feedforward multilayered networks, are usually opaque
many experts (without having to formulate the prob- to the user in that they are difficult for an outside observer
lem explicitly in mathematical expressions) to understand or modify; and the problem of deciding the
structure and size of proper neural networks which ensure
Neural networks research (as shown in Fig. 4) and its ap-
that there are enough neurons in the hidden layers; whether
plications (67.68) can be classified as either the software or the learning algorithm is able to find the global minimum
the hardware approach (69-71). The software approach for the performance function; and does the learning data
simulates neural networks by programming its learning al-
contain enough information to describe the unknown under-
gorithms. However, this approach does not exploit the in- lying functions with respect to both nonlinear and dynamic
trinsic parallelism of neural networks, which may result in
behavior.
computational complexities such as training time, network
size, data sizes, and so forth. On the other hand, the hard-
ware approach which builds neural networks by analog
VLSl techniques or optical computers (intrinsic parallelism
exploited) is too costly to implement. Hidden
To date, there are several neural network models (72- layer
83), varying in the connectivity architectures, transfer func-
tions (84-94), and the training laws (50-66,94-100). How-
ever, the basic neural network is a computing system with
highly interconnected processing units which processes in-
formation by its dynamic-state response to external inputs
(illustrated in Fig. 5).
Each processing neuron (node) is connected to several
other processing neurons, and each of these connections is
associated with a connection strength (weight). Information
processing using neural networks consists of analyzing
patterns of activity, with learned information stored as
weights between the neurons. The output of each process- Figure 5. An artificial neural network model.
 METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Conclusion
This article has presented a review of relevant literature.
Although this review is not exhaustive, it provides a repre-
sentative set o f methodologies and techniques available in
the literature. This survey failed t o locate any published
evidence in the literature that deals with analysis, sensitiv-
ity analysis, prediction, and inverse modeling of experimen-
tal design using artificial neural networks. It further reveals
that there is, generally, a lack of integration and understand-
ing o f statistical techniques and planning procedures among
existing methodologies. Therefore, there is a need to have
an intelligent robust system for experimental design and
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
decision support to provide a systematic experimental de-
sign procedure for novice users to plan, develop, analyze,
manage, organize, learn, and generalize the ingredients and
influences of an experimental designs.
It is the author's conclusion, based on industrial research
and working experience with the existing methodologies of
experimental design, that Taguchi concepts are more appli-
cable to manufacturing and product design engineering
environments. This is because, generally, statisticians using
experimental design concentrated most commonly on the
"location" of a process, trying to increase yields, decrease
by-products, o r understand a process, trying to control in-
puts to maintain a desired result or combination o f results.
On the other hand, engineers tend to focus on the "bonom
line." What interests them are methods they can exploit to
find answers in terms they and their managers understand.
References
Phadke, M., Quality Engineering Using Robust Design,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.
Fisher, R. A,, Statistical Methods for Research Workers,
Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, 1930.
Fisher, R. A,, Design of Experiment, Oliver & Boyd,
Edinburgh, 1966.
Box, G. E. P., Hunter, W. G., and Hunter, J. S., Statisticsfor
Experimenters-An Introduction to Design, Data Analysis
and Model Building, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1978.
Bendell, A,, Disney, J., and Pridmore, W. A,, Taguchi-
Methods: Applications in World Industry, IFS Publications/
Springer-Verlag, Kempston, 1989.
Ranjit, R., A Primer on the Taguchi Method, Competitive
Manufacturing Series, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,
1990.
Schneiderman, A. M., Optimum Quality Costs and Zero
Defects: Are They Contradictory Concepts? Qual. Prog.,
ll,28-31 (1986).
7. Quinlan, J., Product Improvement by Application of
Taguchi Methods, AS1 Inc., Dearbom, MI, 1985.
8. Taguchi, G., System of Experimental Design (Vols. I and
2), UnipubIKraus International Publications, New York,
1987.
9. Gunter, B. H., A Perspective on Taguchi Methods, Qual.
Prog., 6,44-52 (1987).
10. Sullivan, L. P., The Power of Taguchi Methods, Qual.
Prog.. 20, 15-20 (1987).
11. Wild, R. H. and Pignatiello, J. J., Jr., An Experimental De-
sign Strategy for Designing Robust Systems Using Dis-
crete-Event Simulation, Simulation, 57(6), 358-368 (1991).
I la. Kackar, R. N. and Shoemaker, A. C., Robust Design. A
Cost-Effective Method for Improving Manufacturing Pro-
cesses, AT&T Tech. J.,65(2), 39-50 (1986).
Ilb. Montgomery, D. C., Using Fractional Factorial Designs for
Robust Design Process Development, Qual. Eng.. 3(2), 10-
20 (1992).
12. Plackett, R. L. and Burman, J. P., The Design of Optimum
Multifactorial Experiments, Biometrika, 33, 305-325
(1946).
13. Taguchi, G. and Wu, A,, Introduction to Off-line Quality
Control, JQCA, Tokyo, 1985.
14. Ross, P. J., Taguchi Techniques for Quality Engineering,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988.
15. Kackar, R. N., Off-line Quality Control, Parameter Design
and the Taguchi Method, J. Qual. Technol:, 17, 176-1 88
(1985).
16. Hunter, J. S., Statistical Design Applied to Product Design,
J. Qual. Technol., 17,21&221 (1985).
17. Montgomery, D. C., Design and Analysis oJExperiments,
3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1991.
18. Taguchi, G. and Konishi, S., Taguchi Methods: Orthogonal
Arrays and Linear Graphs: Toolsfor Quality Engineering,
ASI, Inc., Dearbom, MI, 1987.
19. Taguchi, G. and Phadke, M. S., Quality Engineering
Through Design Optimization, in IEEE Glohecom 1984
Conference, 1984, Vol. 3, pp. 1106-1 113.
20 Box, G. E. P., Bisgaard, S., and Fung, C., An Explanation
and Critique of Taguchi's Contributions to Quality Engi-
neering, Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag.. 4, 123-1 3 1 (1988).
21 Hoadley, A. B. and Kettenring, J. R., Communications Be-
tween Statisticians and EngineersIScientists,
Technometrics. 32, 1-9 (1990).
22. Logothetis, N. and Wynn, H. P., Quality Through Design:
Experimenlal Design, Offline Quality Control and
Taguchi's Contributions, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989.
23 Pignatiello, J. J. and Ramberg, J. S., Discussion of Off-line
Quality Control. Parameter Design, and the Taguchi
Method, J. Qual. Technol., 17(4), 151-162 (1985).
24 Box, G. E. P., Signal-to-noise Ratios, Performance Criteria
and Transformations, Technometrics, 30, 1-3 1 (1988).
25 Nair, V. N. and Pregibon, D., A Data Analysis Strategy for
Quality Engineering Experiments, AT&T Tech. J., 65(3),
73-84 (1986).

Kusaba, I., Statistical Methods in Japanese Quality Con-
trol. Socictas Qualitatis 2, Union of Japanese Scientists and
Engineers.
Box, G. E. P. and Jones, S. S., An Investigation of the
Method of Accumulation Analysis, Total Qual. Manag.. I,
101-1 13 (1990).
Logothctis, N., Off-line Quality Control and Ill-Designed
Data, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int., 3, 227-238 (1987).
Bisgaard. S., Quality Engineering and Taguchi Methods: A
Perspective, Target. 13-19 (October 1989).
Leon, R. V., Shoemaker, A. C., and Kackar R. N., Perfor-
mance Measures Independent of Adjustment: An Explana-
tion and Extension of Taguchi Signal-to-Noise
Ratio, Technometrics. 29, 253-285 (1987).
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
Hamada, M. and Wu, C. F. J., Discussion of Testing in In-
dustrial Experiment with Ordered Categorical Data,
Technometrics, 28, 295-30 1 (1 992).
Hill, W. J. and Hunter, W. C., A Review of Response Sur-
face Methodology: A Literature Review, Technometrics,8,
57 1-590 (1966).
Vining, G. G. and Myers. R. H., Combiriing Taguchi & Re-
sponse Surface Philosophies: A Dual Response Approach,
J. Qual. Technol.. 22, 38-45 (1990).
Welch. W. J., Yu, T. K., Kang, S. M., and Stack, J., Com-
puter Experiments for Quality Control by Parameter De-
sign, J. Qual. Technol., 2 2 , 3 1-37 (1 990).
Khuri, A. I. and Cornell, J. A,, Response Surjaces. Marcel
Dekker. Inc. New York. 1987.
Logothetis, N. and Haigh, A., The Statistical Flexibility of
Taguchi Method in the Optimization of Multi-response Pro-
ccsscs, Profess. Statist.. 6(7), 10-1 6 (1 987).
Bates, D. M. and Watts. D. G., Multiresponse Estimation
with Special Application to Linear Systems of Differential
Equations, Technometrics. 7, 329-339 (1985).
Box, G. E. P., Hunter, W. G., MacGregor, J. F., and
Erjavec, J., Some Problems Associated with the Analysis of
Multiresponsc Data, Technometrics. 15,33-51 (1973).
Dciringer, G. and Suich, R., Simultaneous Optimization of
Several Response Variables, J. Qual. Technol.. 12.2 1+2 19
(1980).
Seber, G. A. F., Multivariate Observations. John Wiley &
Sons, New York, 1984.
Khuri, A. I. and Conlon, M., Simultaneous Optimization of
Multiple Responses Represented by Polynomial Regression
Functions, Technometrics. 23, 363-375 (1981).
Khuri, A. I., A Test for Lack of Fit of a Linear Multi-
response Model. Technometrics. 27,213-218 (1985).
Morrison, D. F., Multivariate Statistical Methods, 2nd ed.,
McGmw-Hill, New York, 1976.
Joglekar, A. and Kackar R., Graphical and Computer Aided
Approaches to Plan Experiments, in Transactions of the
1988 Annual Qualify Congress. American Society for Qual-
ity Control, Milwaukee, WI, 1988, pp. 45-55.
Lee, N. S., Phadke, M. S., and Keny, R. S., An Expert Sys-
tem for Experimental Design: Automating the Design of
TAY AND BUTLER
Orthogonal Array Experiments, in ASQC Transactions of
Annual Quality Congress, 1988, pp. 45-49.
Linden, R. J. P., Renes, W. A,, and Rademaker, 0 . . PRI-
MAL: A Package for Real-Time Interactive Modeling,
Analysis and Learning, Benelux Quart. J. Automatic Con-
trol, 29(1), 1-9 (1988).
Meeker, W. Q., Hahn, G. H., and Feder, P. I., A Computer
Program for Evaluating and Comparing Experimental De-
signs and Some Applications, Am. Statistician, 29(1), 60-
64 (1975).
Wu, C. F. J., Mao, S. S., and Ma, F. S., SEL: A Search
Method Based on Orthogonal Arrays, in Statistical Design
and Analysis of Industrial Experiments, Marcel Dekker,
Inc., New York, 1990.
Gale, W. A. and Pregibon, D., REX: An Expert System for
Regression Analysis, in Proceedings of the COMPSTAT 84,
Physica-Verlag, Prague, 1984, pp. 242-248.
Leonard. J. A,, Kramer, M. A., and Ungar, L. H., Using Ra-
dial Basis Functions to Approximate a Function and Its Er-
ror Bounds, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, NN-3(4), 624-
627 (1992).
Saba, A. and Keeler, J. D., Algorithms for Better Represen-
tation and Faster Learning in Radial Basis Function Net-
works, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys-
tems 2, edited by D. S. Touretzky, Morgan Kaufmann. San
Mateo, CA, 1990, pp. 482-489.
Sarajedini, A. and Hecht-Nielsen, R., The Best of Both
Worlds: Casasent Networks Integrate Multilayer
Perceptrons and Radial Basis Functions, paper read at In-
ternational Joint Conference on Neural Networks. 1992.
Weymaere, N. and Martens, J. P., A Fast and Robust Leam-
ing Algorithm for Feedfonvard Neural Networks, Neural
Networks, 4(3), 36 1-369 (1991).
Widrow, B., Learning Phenomena in Layered Neural Net-
works, in Proceedings afthe IEEE First Ink-matianal Con-
ference on Neural Networks, 1987, pp. 4 1 1-430.
Widrow, B., The Original Adaptive Neural Network Broom
Balancer, in Proceedings of the First International Sympo-
sium on Circuits and Systems, 1988, pp. 351-357.
Chen, S., Cowan, C. F. N., and Grant, P. M., Orthogonal
Least Squares Learning Algorithm for Radial Basis Func-
tion Networks, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, NN-2(2),
302-309 (1991).
Lippmann, R., A Critical Review of Neural Network Pdt-
tern Classifiers, in Proceedings ofthe IEEE Workshop on
Neural Networksfor Signal Processing, 1991, pp. 266-275.
Lapedes, A. and Farber, R., How Neural Nets Work, Los
Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, 1988.
Hornik, K., Stinchcombe, M., and White, H., Multilayer
Feedfonvard Networks Are Universal Approximators, Neu-
ral Networks, 2,359-366 (1989).
Gupta, M. M., Kiszka, J. B., and Trojan, G. M., Multivari-
able Structure of Fuzzy Control Systems, IEEE Trans. Syst.
Man Cybern., SMC-16, 638-656 (1986).
Hartman, E. J., Keeler, J. D., and Kowalski, J. M., Layered
 METHODOLOGIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Neural Networks with Gaussian Hidden Units as Universal
Approximations, Neural Comput., 2(2), 2 1 6 2 1 5 (1990).
Kadirkamanathan, V., Niranjan, M., and Fallside, F., Se-
quential Adaptation of Radial Basis Function Neural Net-
works and Its Application to Time-Series Prediction, in
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 3, R.
P. Lippmann, J. E. Moody, and D. S. Touretzky, Morgan
Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1991, pp. 72 1-727.
Grossberg, S., Nonlinear Neural Networks: Principles,
Mechanisms, and Architectures, Neural Networks. 1, 17-61
(1988).
Girosi, F., On Some Extensions of Radial Basis Functions
and Their Applications in Artificial Intelligence, Comput-
ers Math. Applic., 24(12), 61-80 (1992).
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
Funahashi, K. I., On the Approximate of Continuous Map-
pings by Neural Networks, Neural Networks, 2, 1 8 N 9 2
(1989).
Kohonen, T. and Ruohonen, M., Representation of Associ-
ated Data by Matrix Operators, IEEE Trans. Computer, C-
22,701-702 (1973).
Ljung, L., Issues in Systems Identification, IEEE Control
Syst.. 1, 25-29 (1991).
Narendra, K. S. and Parthasarthy, K., Identification and
Control of Dynamical Systems Using Neural Networks,
IEEE Trans. Neural Networks. NN-1.4-27 ( 1990).
Hecht-Nielsen, R., Neurocomputing, Addison-Wesley,
Reading MA, 1990.
Rumelhart, D. E. and McCleland, J. L., ParallelDistributed
Processing, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1986.
Pedrycz, W., Fuzzy Controls and Fuzzy Systems, John
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1989.
Broomhead, D. S. and Lowe, D., Multivariable Functional
Interpolation and Adaptive Networks, Complex Syst., 2,
321-355 (1988).
Fukushima, K., Miyake, S.. and Takayuki, T., Neo-
cognition: A Neural Network Model for a Mechanism of
Visual Pattern. Recognition, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man
Cybern., SMC- 13, 826-834 (1983).
Gupta, M.M., Fuzzy Logic and Neural Networks, in Tenth
International Conference on Multicriterion Decision Mak-
ing, 1992, pp. 281-294.
Jokinen, P. A., On the Relations Between Radial Basis
Function Networks and Fuzzy Systems, in Proceedings In-
ternational Joint Conference on Neural Networks, 1992,
pp. 1123-1 128.
Kaufmann, A. and Gupta, M. M., Introduction to Fuzzy
Arithmetic: Theory and Applications, 2nd ed., Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 199 1.
Kohonen, T., Self-organizing and Associative Memory,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988.
Kolen, J. F, and Goel, A. K., Learning in Parallel Distrib-
uted Processing Networks: Computational Complexity and
Information Content, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..
SMC-21(2), 359-367 (1991).
Kosko, B., Adaptive Inference in Fuzzy Knowledge Net-
355
works, in Proceedings of the IEEE First International Con-
ference on Neural network^. Vol. 11, 1987, pp. 261-268.
Kosko, B., Neural Networks for Signal Processing,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1992.
Kosko, B., Fuzzy Knowledge Combination, Int. J. htell.
Syst., I , 293-320 (1986).
Simpson, P. K., Fuzzy Mi*Max Neural NetworksPan I:
Classification, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, NN-3(5),
776-786 (1992).
Speclit, D. F., A General Regression Neural Network, IEEE
Trans. Neural Networks, NN-2(6), 568-576 (1991).
Baldi, P., Computing with Arrays of Bell-Shaped and Sig-
moid Functions, in Advances in Neural Information Pro-
cessing Systems 3, edited by R. P. Lippmann, J. E. Moody,
and D. S. Touretzky, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA,
1991, pp. 735-742.
Bishop, C., Improving the Generalization Properties of Ra-
dial Basis Function Neural Networks, Neural Comput..
3(4), 579-588 (1991).
Cover, T. M., Geometrical and Statistical Properties of Sys-
tems of Linear Inequalities with Application in Pattern Rec-
ognition, IEEE. Trans. Electron. Computer. EC- 14, 122-
132 (1965).
Cybenko, G., Approximation by Superpositions of
Sigmoidal Functions, Math. Control Signals Syst.. 2,303-
314 (1989).
Dyn, N., interpolation and Approximation by Radial and
Related Functions, Approximation Theory. VI, edited by C.
K. Chui, L. L. Schumaker, and D. J. Ward, Academic Press,
New York, 1991, pp. 21 1-234.
Girosi, F. and Anzellotti, G., Rates of Convergence for Ra-
dial Basis Functions and Neural Networks, in Artijicial
Neural Networks with Applications in Speech and Vision,
Chapman & Hall, London, 1993.
Lorentz, G. G., Approximation of Functions. Chelsea Pub-
lishing Co., New York, 1986.
Moody, J. and Darken, C., Learning with Localized Recep-
tive Fields, in Proceedings of the 1988 Connectionist Mod-
els Summer School, edited by D. Touretzky, G. Hinton, and
T. Sejnowski, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1988,
pp. 133-143.
Park, J. and Sandberg, I. W., Universal Approximation Us-
ing Radial-Basis-Function Networks, Neural Comput.. 3(2),
246-257 (1 991).
Powell, M. I. D., Radial Basis Functions for Multivariable
Interpolation: A Review, in Algorithms for Approximation.
edited by J. C. Mason and M. G. Cox, Clarendon Press. Ox-
ford, 1987, pp. 143-167.
Wang, L. X., Fuzzy Logic Are Universal Approximators, in
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on
Fuzzy Systems, 1992, pp. I 163-1 170.
Moody, J. and Darken, C., Fast Learning in Networks of
Locally-Tuned Processing Units, Neural Comput.. 1(2),
281-294 (1989).

96. Yamakawa, T., A Fuzzy Inference Engine in Nonlinear
Analog Mode and Its Application to a Fuzzy Logic Control,
IEEE Trans. Neural Networks. NN-4(3), 233-242 (1993).
97. Zadeh, L. A,, Fuzzy Sets, Inform Control. 8, 338-353
(1965).
98. Zadeh, L. A,, Toward a Theory of Fuzzy Systems, in As-
pects of Nerwork~and Systems Theory. Rinehart and Win-
ston, New York, 1971.
99. Zadeh, L. A,, Outline of a New Approach to the Analysis
of Complex Systems and Decision Process, IEEE Trans.
Syst. Man Cybern.. SMC-3(I), 28-44 (1973).
100. Zimmerman, H. J., Fuzzy Set Theory and Its Applications.
Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1991.
Downloaded by [USP University of Sao Paulo] at 14:52 26 February 2013
TAY AND BUTLER
Abour the Author: Kiang-Meng Tay, Ph.D., M.Sc. (Distinc-
tion), B.Eng. (First Class Honours), is a research Fellow at
Gintic Institute of Manufacturing Technology, Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore. He specializes in ad-
vanced quality engineering, robust systems designs, intel-
ligent optimization techneques. artificial intelligence, neu-
ral networks, and data mining.
Clive Butler, Ph.D., M.Sc., DIC, D.MS, B.Sc. (Hons.),
M.I.O.P., F.I.Q.A., is a director of Postgraduate Programs
at Brunel University, Uxbridge, U.K. His main area of in-
terest is in advanced quality engineering and management
sensors and instrumentation and fuzzy neural networks.