Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

GAQM CLSSBB-001 Exam - Topic 5 Question 74 Discussion

Actual exam question for GAQM's CLSSBB-001 exam
Question #: 74
Topic #: 5
[All CLSSBB-001 Questions]

If an experiment has 5 factors and no replicates for a 2-level Experimental Design with 16 experimental runs which statement is incorrect?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Tegan at Jul 31, 2025, 04:15 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CLSSBB-001 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Anglea
5 months ago
Not sure about B, feels off to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maile
5 months ago
C is tricky, but I think it's correct.
upvoted 0 times
...
Micheline
5 months ago
Wait, how can D have 8 runs? That doesn't add up!
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynelle
5 months ago
I agree, B seems right too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chandra
6 months ago
A is definitely half-fractional.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shelia
6 months ago
I’m pretty sure that if there are 5 factors, we can't have just 8 runs, so option D seems incorrect to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mee
6 months ago
I feel like option C might be tricky because it mentions confounding, and I remember that being a common issue in these designs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Flo
7 months ago
I think I saw a similar question where main effects were confounded with interactions, but I can't recall the specifics.
upvoted 0 times
...
Goldie
7 months ago
I remember studying fractional factorial designs, but I'm not entirely sure if 16 runs means it's half-fractional or not.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vernice
7 months ago
This seems straightforward enough. I'm pretty confident I can identify the incorrect statement based on my understanding of 2-level factorial designs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dylan
7 months ago
I've got a good strategy for this. I'll start by identifying the key characteristics of the design, then use that to evaluate each of the statements and determine which one is incorrect.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delmy
7 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the wording of the question. Can someone help me understand the difference between "confounded" and "aliased" in the context of this problem?
upvoted 0 times
...
Reita
7 months ago
Okay, let's see. 5 factors, 2-level design, 16 runs... I think I know the answer, but I want to double-check my work before committing to an option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jeanice
8 months ago
Hmm, this looks like a tricky one. I'll need to think through the details of the experimental design to figure out which statement is incorrect.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lura
8 months ago
I'm not sure, but I think the Experimental Design is half-fractional
upvoted 0 times
...
Leana
8 months ago
I disagree, I believe the correct statement is C)
upvoted 0 times
...
Hubert
8 months ago
Hmm, this question is giving me a headache. Maybe I should have skipped the caffeine today.
upvoted 0 times
Kati
4 months ago
I think D is the one that's incorrect.
upvoted 0 times
...
Audria
5 months ago
I feel you, it's confusing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eun
5 months ago
This question is tricky!
upvoted 0 times
...
Thurman
6 months ago
Agreed, D doesn't seem right at all.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Adolph
8 months ago
I think the correct statement is B)
upvoted 0 times
...
Yuette
9 months ago
B is wrong. The main effects are confounded with 4-way interactions, not just 4-way.
upvoted 0 times
Rebecka
8 months ago
A) The Experimental Design is half-fractional
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Zoila
10 months ago
I'm going with A. A half-fractional design with 5 factors and 16 runs is the way to go here.
upvoted 0 times
Toi
8 months ago
A) The Experimental Design is half-fractional
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Makeda
10 months ago
D is definitely incorrect. With 5 factors and a 2-level design, there should be 32 experimental runs, not 8.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tatum
10 months ago
I think C is the correct answer. The main effects are not confounded, but the 2-way interactions are confounded with the 3-way interactions.
upvoted 0 times
Moon
8 months ago
I think C is the correct answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel