As a case study, this thesis develops methods for the analysis of large amounts of data generated from a simulated ecosystem designed to understand how mammalian biomechanics interact with environmental complexity to modulate the outcomes of predator–prey interactions. These simulations investigate how other biomechanical parameters relating to the agility of animals in predator–prey pairs are better predictors of pursuit outcomes. Traditional modelling techniques such as forward, backward, and stepwise variable selection are initially used to study these data, but the number of parameters and potentially relevant interaction effects render these methods impractical. Consequently, new modelling techniques such as LASSO regularization are used and compared to the traditional techniques in terms of accuracy and computational complexity. Finally, the splitting rules and instances in the leaves of classification trees provide the basis for future simulation with an economical number of additional runs. In general, this thesis shows the increased utility of these sophisticated statistical techniques with simulated ecological data compared to the approaches traditionally used in these fields. These techniques combined with methods from industrial Design of Experiments will help ecologists extract novel insights from simulations that combine habitat complexity, population structure, and biomechanics.
Ultimate Frisbee or "Ultimate," is a fast growing field sport that is being played competitively at universities across the country. Many mid-tier college teams have the goal of winning as many games as possible, however they also need to grow their program by training and retaining new players. The purpose of this project was to create a prototype statistical tool that maximizes a player line-up's probability of scoring the next point, while having as equal playing time across all experienced and novice players as possible. Game, player, and team data was collected for 25 different games played over the course of 4 tournaments during Fall 2017 and early Spring 2018 using the UltiAnalytics iPad application. "Amount of Top 1/3 Players" was the measure of equal playing time, and "Line Efficiency" and "Line Interaction" represented a line's probability of scoring. After running a logistic regression, Line Efficiency was found to be the more accurate predictor of scoring outcome than Line Interaction. An "Equal PT Measure vs. Line Efficiency" graph was then created and the plot showed what the optimal lines were depending on what the user's preferences were at that point in time. Possible next steps include testing the model and refining it as needed.
The first step in process improvement is to scope the problem, next is measure the current process, but if data is not readily available and cannot be manually collected, then a measurement system must be implemented. General Dynamics Mission Systems (GDMS) is a lean company that is always seeking to improve. One of their current bottlenecks is the incoming inspection department. This department is responsible for finding defects on parts purchased and is critical to the high reliability product produced by GDMS. To stay competitive and hold their market share, a decision was made to optimize incoming inspection. This proved difficult because no data is being collected. Early steps in many process improvement methodologies, such as Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control (DMAIC), include data collection; however, no measurement system was in place, resulting in no available data for improvement. The solution to this problem was to design and implement a Management Information System (MIS) that will track a variety of data. This will provide the company with data that will be used for analysis and improvement. The first stage of the MIS was developed in Microsoft Excel with Visual Basic for Applications because of the low cost and overall effectiveness of the software. Excel allows update to be made quickly, and allows GDMS to collect data immediately. Stage two would be moving the MIS to a more practicable software, such as Access or MySQL. This thesis is only focuses on stage one of the MIS, and GDMS will proceed with stage two.
Based on findings of previous studies, there was speculation that two well-known experimental design software packages, JMP and Design Expert, produced varying power outputs given the same design and user inputs. For context and scope, another popular experimental design software package, Minitab® Statistical Software version 17, was added to the comparison. The study compared multiple test cases run on the three software packages with a focus on 2k and 3K factorial design and adjusting the standard deviation effect size, number of categorical factors, levels, number of factors, and replicates. All six cases were run on all three programs and were attempted to be run at one, two, and three replicates each. There was an issue at the one replicate stage, however—Minitab does not allow for only one replicate full factorial designs and Design Expert will not provide power outputs for only one replicate unless there are three or more factors. From the analysis of these results, it was concluded that the differences between JMP 13 and Design Expert 10 were well within the margin of error and likely caused by rounding. The differences between JMP 13, Design Expert 10, and Minitab 17 on the other hand indicated a fundamental difference in the way Minitab addressed power calculation compared to the latest versions of JMP and Design Expert. This was found to be likely a cause of Minitab’s dummy variable coding as its default instead of the orthogonal coding default of the other two. Although dummy variable and orthogonal coding for factorial designs do not show a difference in results, the methods affect the overall power calculations. All three programs can be adjusted to use either method of coding, but the exact instructions for how are difficult to find and thus a follow-up guide on changing the coding for factorial variables would improve this issue.
