mathematical model for the law of comparative judgment in print sample evaluation mai zhou dept. of...

19
Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark International Inc.

Upload: silvester-powers

Post on 13-Dec-2015

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation

Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky

Luke C.CuiLexmark International Inc.

Page 2: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

The Problem:When evaluating several print samples, pair-wise

comparison experiments are often used. Two print samples at a time are judged by a human

subject to determine which print sample is “better”.

This is repeated with different pairs and different subjects.

The resulting data will look like:

/ 5 4 37 6 / / 7 45 28 / / / 46 40 / / / / 4

Page 3: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

How to Summarize the data;

Order the print samples in terms of “strength”;

Margin of error in the analysis/conclusion.

Predict the outcome of future comparisons.

Page 4: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Outline of talk

Introduction to

Thurstone/Mosteller Model

New model, theoretical formulation

Var-Cor modeling, Maximum Likelihood Estimation,

Likelihood ratio confidence interval

New model, application to experimental dataComparisons with classical model, how good is the fit?Discussion

Page 5: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

For pairwise comparisons of stimuli i and k, the observable outcomes are the signs of

and the outcomes from different pairs are

independent.(but within the pair, they may or may not be

independent). Assume

Where N( , ) denotes the normal distribution.

)( ki TT

),(~)( 2jkkiki ssNTT

Page 6: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

If we observed the outcomes of many pairs, the log likelihood function is

where

And is the cdf of the standard normal distribution (available in many software

packages).

ik

kijkki

ssssNPwinP

)(0

1)0),(()(

pairs

ikik losePLwinPWllk )(log)(log

)(t

Page 7: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Where W (or L) is the times stimulus i is deemed better (or worse) than stimulus k in the pair-wise comparisons.

The classical model assumes

The new model we propose assumes for the variances

kjjkkjjk r 2222

),( kjjk ssf

Page 8: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Because the human perceptual process is highly adaptive and is at its best when used as a null tester, ie, more sensitive for closely matched stimuli. Thus the variances should be related to how closely the strengths are matched. e.g. ||1 kjjk ss

Page 9: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Computation

Use software Splus (commercial) or R (Gnu) or Mathcad (commercial) or Matlab (commercial) or SAS (commerical)

1. Define the log likelihood function llk() as a function of the parameters.

Page 10: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

2. Maximize the llk() or minimize the negative of llk() by using the optimization functions supplied.

In R the optimize functions are: nlm( ) optim( )

In SAS iml we could use function nlptr( )

Page 11: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

The parameter values that achieve the maximization (max1) are the estimate of the parameters.Confidence interval of the parameter can be obtained by temporarily fix the value of the parameter at and maximize over the remaining parameters. Suppose it achieved maximum value max2.those values for which

max1 – max2 < 3.84/2

is the 95% confidence interval for the parameter.

t

t

Page 12: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Example: Colorfulness data

Nine print samples were compared. Pairwise experiment, 50 subjects

Page 13: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Models fitted are: 1. Classic model with equal

variances. 2. New model

||1 kjjk ss

Page 14: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Models fitted are:2. New model

0

1

2

3

0 1 2 3

Diff erence in scaled values

Page 15: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Differences: (predicted – observed) Model 1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

-0.2

-0.1

0.0

0.1

0.2

Index

pair

data

7/50

- v

fn72

pred

(est

1)

Page 16: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Differences: (predicted – observed) Model 2 with one more para.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

-0.2

-0.1

0.0

0.1

0.2

Index

pair

data

7/50

- v

fn75

pred

(est

2)

Page 17: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

Differences: (predicted – observed) Model 1 vs 2

Page 18: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

We also fit Bradley-Terry model to the data (use SAS) and the fit is similar to the classic model.

Page 19: Mathematical Model for the Law of Comparative Judgment in Print Sample Evaluation Mai Zhou Dept. of Statistics, University of Kentucky Luke C.Cui Lexmark

References1. Peter, G. Engeldrum, Psychometric scaling, A toolkit for imaging system development, Imcotek press. (2000) 2. Torgerson, W.S. Theory and methods of scaling, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (1958)3. Bradley, R.A. and Terry, M. E. "Rank analysis of incomplete block design. I. The method of paired comparisons." Biometrika 39, 324-345. (1952)4. P. Hall and B. La Scala, Methodology and algorithms of empirical likelihood, International Statistical Review, 58, 109-127. (1990)

R: http://cran.us.r-project.orgUpdated manuscript: http://www.ms.uky.edu/~mai/research/

Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Dr. Shaun Love at Lexmark International Inc. for helpful discussions.