IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v13y2025i18p2950-d1748005.html

Robust D-Optimal Mixture Designs Under Manufacturing Tolerances via Multi-Objective NSGA-II

Author

Listed:
  • Wanida Limmun

    (Research Center in Data Science for Health Study, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Walailak University, Thasala, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand)

  • Boonorm Chomtee

    (Department of Statistics, Kasetsart University, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900, Thailand)

  • John J. Borkowski

    (Department of Mathematical Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA)

Abstract

This study proposes a multi-objective optimization framework for generating statistically efficient and operationally robust designs in constrained mixture experiments with irregular experimental regions. In industrial settings, manufacturing variability from batching inaccuracies, raw material inconsistencies, or process drift can degrade nominally optimal designs. Traditional methods focus on nominal efficiency but neglect robustness, and few explicitly incorporate percentile-based criteria. To address this limitation, the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II) was employed to simultaneously maximize nominal D-efficiency and the 10th-percentile D-efficiency (R-D 10 ), a conservative robustness metric representing the efficiency level exceeded by 90% of perturbed implementations. Six design generation methods were evaluated across seven statistical criteria using two case studies: a constrained concrete formulation and a glass chemical durability study. NSGA-II designs consistently achieved top rankings for D-efficiency, R-D 10 , A-efficiency, and G-efficiency, while maintaining competitive IV-efficiency and scaled prediction variance (SPV) values. Robustness improvements were notable, with R-D 10 by 1.5–5.1% higher than the best alternative. Fraction of design space plots further confirmed its resilience, demonstrating low variance and stable performance across the design space.

Suggested Citation

  • Wanida Limmun & Boonorm Chomtee & John J. Borkowski, 2025. "Robust D-Optimal Mixture Designs Under Manufacturing Tolerances via Multi-Objective NSGA-II," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-29, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:18:p:2950-:d:1748005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/18/2950/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/18/2950/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goos, P. & Syafitri, U. & Sartono, B. & Vazquez, A.R., 2020. "A nonlinear multidimensional knapsack problem in the optimal design of mixture experiments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(1), pages 201-221.
    2. R.J. Martin & L.M. Platts & A.B. Seddon & E.C. Stillman, 2003. "Applications: The Design And Analysis of a Mixture Experiment on Glass Durability," Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics, Australian Statistical Publishing Association Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 19-27, March.
    3. Wanida Limmun & Boonorm Chomtee & John J. Borkowski, 2023. "Generating Robust Optimal Mixture Designs Due to Missing Observation Using a Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    4. Roselinde Kessels & Peter Goos & Bradley Jones & Martina Vandebroek, 2011. "Rejoinder: the usefulness of Bayesian optimal designs for discrete choice experiments," Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 197-203, May.
    5. Mao, Yicheng & Kessels, Roselinde & van der Zanden, Tom C., 2025. "Constructing Bayesian optimal designs for discrete choice experiments by simulated annealing," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    6. Sungil Kim & Heeyoung Kim & Richard W. Lu & Jye-Chyi Lu & Michael J. Casciato & Martha A. Grover, 2015. "Adaptive combined space-filling and D-optimal designs," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(17), pages 5354-5368, September.
    7. Peter Goos & Bradley Jones & Utami Syafitri, 2016. "I-Optimal Design of Mixture Experiments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(514), pages 899-911, April.
    8. Roselinde Kessels & Bradley Jones & Peter Goos & Martina Vandebroek, 2011. "The usefulness of Bayesian optimal designs for discrete choice experiments," Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 173-188, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mao, Yicheng & Kessels, Roselinde & van der Zanden, Tom C., 2025. "Constructing Bayesian optimal designs for discrete choice experiments by simulated annealing," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    2. Zijlstra, Toon & Goos, Peter & Verhetsel, Ann, 2019. "A mixture-amount stated preference study on the mobility budget," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 230-246.
    3. Collewet, Marion & Fairley, Kim & Kessels, Roselinde & Knoef, Marike & van Vliet, Olaf, 2024. "The design of welfare: unraveling taxpayers' preferences," OSF Preprints 4am7e, Center for Open Science.
    4. Danaf, Mazen & Atasoy, Bilge & de Azevedo, Carlos Lima & Ding-Mastera, Jing & Abou-Zeid, Maya & Cox, Nathaniel & Zhao, Fang & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2019. "Context-aware stated preferences with smartphone-based travel surveys," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 35-50.
    5. Meles, Tensay Hadush & Ryan, Lisa & Mukherjee, Sanghamitra C., 2022. "Heterogeneity in preferences for renewable home heating systems among Irish households," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    6. Srivastava, Aman & Van Passel, Steven & Kessels, Roselinde & Valkering, Pieter & Laes, Erik, 2020. "Reducing winter peaks in electricity consumption: A choice experiment to structure demand response programs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    7. Joalland, Olivier & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre, 2023. "Developing large-scale offshore wind power programs: A choice experiment analysis in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    8. Markose Chekol Zewdie & Michele Moretti & Daregot Berihun Tenessa & Steven Passel, 2024. "Farmers’ preferences and willingness to pay for improved irrigation water supply program: a discrete choice experiment," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 27277-27300, November.
    9. Gajderowicz, Tomasz & Wincenciak, Leszek & Grotkowska, Gabriela, 2024. "How much does a higher education in economics cost? DCE evaluation of the individual (dis)utility of studying," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    10. Prateek Bansal & Roselinde Kessels & Rico Krueger & Daniel J Graham, 2021. "Face masks, vaccination rates and low crowding drive the demand for the London Underground during the COVID-19 pandemic," Papers 2107.02394, arXiv.org.
    11. Palhazi Cuervo, Daniel & Kessels, Roselinde & Goos, Peter & Sörensen, Kenneth, 2016. "An integrated algorithm for the optimal design of stated choice experiments with partial profiles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 648-669.
    12. Richard Yao & Riccardo Scarpa & John Rose & James Turner, 2015. "Experimental Design Criteria and Their Behavioural Efficiency: An Evaluation in the Field," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(3), pages 433-455, November.
    13. André D. Murray & Rosa K. Gallardo & Anuradha Prakash, 2025. "Mexican consumers' attitudes toward irradiated and imported apples," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 694-718, July.
    14. Mohd Zuhair & Ram Babu Roy, 2022. "Eliciting relative preferences for the attributes of health insurance schemes among rural consumers in India," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 443-458, December.
    15. T. Lehnert & O. H. Günther & A. Hajek & S. G. Riedel-Heller & H. H. König, 2018. "Preferences for home- and community-based long-term care services in Germany: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(9), pages 1213-1223, December.
    16. Srivastava, A. & Van Passel, S. & Valkering, P. & Laes, E.J.W., 2021. "Power outages and bill savings: A choice experiment on residential demand response acceptability in Delhi," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    17. Bansal, Prateek & Kessels, Roselinde & Krueger, Rico & Graham, Daniel J., 2022. "Preferences for using the London Underground during the COVID-19 pandemic," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 45-60.
    18. Van Acker, Veronique & Kessels, Roselinde & Palhazi Cuervo, Daniel & Lannoo, Steven & Witlox, Frank, 2020. "Preferences for long-distance coach transport: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 759-779.
    19. Kessels, Roselinde & Jones, Bradley & Goos, Peter, 2019. "Using Firth's method for model estimation and market segmentation based on choice data," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 1-21.
    20. van Cranenburgh, Sander & Collins, Andrew T., 2019. "New software tools for creating stated choice experimental designs efficient for regret minimisation and utility maximisation decision rules," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 104-123.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:18:p:2950-:d:1748005. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.