Table 2. Reliability of several constant stimuli protocols based on simulated administration to the 590 normosmic distribution, n = 1,000 subjects with 500 replications.

	Number of Stimuli	16	12	8	6	(6)x2 a
Evenly Distributed	Dilutions Administered	1–16	1–3, 5–7, 9–11, 13–16	2–16 (Even) b	2, 5, 8, 9, 12, 15	(2, 5, 8, 9, 12, 15)x2
	Mean Reliability c	0.844	0.797	0.709	0.651	0.806
	5%, 50%, 95%	0.828, 0.845, 0.860	0.775, 0.796, 0.817	0.682, 0.709, 0.736	0.616, 0.652, 0.680	0.787, 0.806, 0.825
	% of Convergence Failures	0.0%	0.0%	6.6%	4.2%	0.0%
Centered	Dilutions Administered	NA d	5–16	7–14	8–13	(8–13)x2
	Mean Reliability		0.809	0.732	0.665	0.772
	5%, 50%, 95%		0.791, 0.809, 0.826	0.708, 0.731, 0.755	0.637, 0.664, 0.694	0.753, 0.772, 0.791
	% of Convergence Failures		0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
Tails	Dilutions Administered	NA	1–6, 11–16	5–8, 13–16	5–7, 14–16	(5–7, 14–16)x2
	Mean Reliability		0.727	0.687	0.555	0.725
	5%, 50%, 95%		0.697, 0.727, 0.754	0.662, 0.688, 0.713	0.507, 0.558, 0.597	0.698, 0.725, 0.750
	% of Convergence Failures		0.0%	0.0%	31.8%	0.0%
Shifted	Dilutions Administered	NA	1–12	1, 3, 5, 7–11	1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11	(1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11)x2
	Mean Reliability		0.796	0.733	0.644	0.783
	5%, 50%, 95%		0.775, 0.796, 0.815	0.709, 0.733, 0.755	0.614, 0.644, 0.672	0.761, 0.783, 0.803
	% of Convergence Failures		0.0%	0.0%	4.2%	0.0%

^aThis configuration presents the identical 6 dilutions used for a given protocol twice for a total of 12 stimuli

^bA configuration using 8 odd dilutions yielded similar results

^cAll reliabilities have a standard error ≤ 0.001

^dNA = not applicable.