Ordered alternatives for interaction effects
交互效应的有序备择假设AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要核心是双因素交互效应的顺序约束检验,未说明因果识别框架,不能仅凭处理效应措辞归入因果推断。
交互效应的有序备择假设AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
The problem of testing hypotheses against ordered alternatives for treatment effects in a one-way layout is discussed by many authors; see, for example, Bartholomew (1959a, b; 1961). For interaction effects in a two-way layout, it is required to specify the ordered alternatives appropriate to practical situations and then to establish the test procedures. James (1961) defined an ordered alternative for a simple case. In the present paper several types of ordered alternatives are defined for the case of the two-factor interaction with one factor A indicating the treatments and the other factor B expressing the stages or degrees of the effects of A. For these ordered alternatives, appropriate methods for testing the null hypothesis are proposed. The powers of these test procedures are examined numerically for the seven different patterns of the alternatives. One real example from a drug experiment is shown as an illustration.