Skip to main content
. 2023 Mar 30;64(4):1275–1304. doi: 10.1007/s00362-023-01436-x

Table 1.

Comparison of average hit rates in different methods for the first numerical example

Average hit rate
Design size 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50
Sequential (4) 0.500 0.535 0.540 0.595 0.570 0.640 0.695 0.715 0.740 0.770
ϕA 0.505 0.500 0.530 0.525 0.505 0.510 0.520 0.535 0.585 0.635
ϕB 0.520 0.545 0.575 0.585 0.615 0.650 0.785 0.875 0.900 0.910
ϕKL 0.520 0.545 0.575 0.585 0.615 0.650 0.785 0.870 0.915 0.925
ΦF 0.580 0.625 0.620 0.625 0.670 0.715 0.795 0.900 0.925 0.950
Φ1 0.525 0.520 0.555 0.540 0.550 0.610 0.725 0.890 0.910 0.920
Φ2 0.525 0.520 0.555 0.540 0.550 0.610 0.715 0.860 0.890 0.910
ΦKL 0.580 0.625 0.620 0.625 0.670 0.715 0.795 0.895 0.925 0.955
ΦΓ 0.595 0.625 0.610 0.645 0.675 0.700 0.795 0.895 0.935 0.940
ΦDs 0.540 0.575 0.590 0.620 0.650 0.675 0.805 0.850 0.855 0.925

Bold numbers indicate the highest average hit rate achieved for each design size