Centre point — where it appears
Named by 3 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The design that cannot see a curve
A two-level factorial has every run at a corner, where every squared term equals one — so the column that would estimate curvature is a copy of the intercept, and the design has no information about it at all. A few runs at the centre buy one number back, and only one.
Three levels, and the ring where the design says the same thing
A central composite design puts its axial runs at ±α, and α is not a matter of taste. At F to the quarter the prediction variance depends only on how far a point is from the centre and not at all on which direction it lies in — a property with no simulation in it, exact or absent.
The design that refuses the corners
Box–Behnken runs three factors in fifteen runs and puts none of them at a corner, which is what makes it usable where a corner cannot be run. It predicts the corner 1.84 times worse than the seventeen-run design that goes there, and 1.31 times worse at the middle of a face, and all three numbers are matrix computations with no simulation in them.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
CurvatureExperimental designFactorial designCentral composite designPrediction varianceRotatabilityBox behnken designDegrees of freedomLeast squaresThe non-central tPure-errorSaddle point