Сравнение на методи
Прегледайте избраните методи един до друг; редовете с разлики са откроени.
| A/B тест (онлайн контролиран експеримент)× | Последователен / Групов последователен дизайн на изпитвания× | |
|---|---|---|
| Област | Планиране на експеримента | Планиране на експеримента |
| Семейство | Hypothesis test | Hypothesis test |
| Година на възникване≠ | 1935 | 1979 |
| Създател≠ | Ron Kohavi et al. (Microsoft); conceptual roots in R. A. Fisher's randomized experiments (1935) | O'Brien & Fleming; Pocock; Lan & DeMets |
| Тип≠ | Parametric comparison (frequentist or Bayesian) | Adaptive stopping trial design |
| Основополагащ източник≠ | Kohavi, R., Tang, D., & Xu, Y. (2020). Trustworthy Online Controlled Experiments: A Practical Guide to A/B Testing. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9781108724265 | O'Brien, P.C. & Fleming, T.R. (1979). A Multiple Testing Procedure for Clinical Trials. Biometrics, 35(3), 549–556. DOI ↗ |
| Други названия≠ | split test, controlled experiment, two-variant test, A/B Testi (Online Kontrollü Deney) | group sequential design, adaptive stopping design, Ardışık Deneme Tasarımı (Sequential / Group Sequential) |
| Свързани≠ | 4 | 3 |
| Резюме≠ | An A/B test is a randomized controlled experiment that simultaneously exposes two groups of users to a control variant (A) and a treatment variant (B) in order to determine whether a measured outcome differs significantly between them. The modern online controlled experiment framework was systematized by Ron Kohavi and colleagues at Microsoft in the early 2000s, building on R. A. Fisher's classical randomization principles from 1935. It is the dominant causal inference tool in web product development, digital marketing, and experimentation platforms. | Sequential and group sequential trial designs allow a study to be stopped early — or continued — based on interim analyses conducted as data accumulate. The core framework was formalised by O'Brien and Fleming in 1979 and extended by Lan and DeMets's alpha-spending approach, and it controls the overall Type I error rate across all planned looks by pre-specifying both efficacy and futility boundaries before enrolment begins. |
| ScholarGateНабор от данни ↗ |
|
|