Near-Optimal A-B Testing

References

• Atkinson AC (1982) Optimum biased coin designs for sequential clinical trials with prognostic factors. Biometrika 69(1):61–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atkinson AC (1999) Optimum biased-coin designs for sequential treatment allocation with covariate information. Statist. Medicine 18(14):1741–1752.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atkinson AC (2002) The comparison of designs for sequential clinical trials with covariate information. J. Royal Statist. Soc. Ser. A 165(2):349–373.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atkinson AC (2014) Selecting a biased-coin design. Statist. Sci. 29(1):144–163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldi Antognini A, Zagoraiou M (2011) The covariate-adaptive biased coin design for balancing clinical trials in the presence of prognostic factors. Biometrika 98(3):519–535.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ball FG, Smith AFM, Verdinelli I (1993) Biased coin designs with a Bayesian bias. J. Statist. Planning Inference 34(3):403–421.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ben-Tal A, Nemirovski A (2001) Lectures on Modern Convex Optimization: Analysis, Algorithms, and Engineering Applications (SIAM, Philadelphia).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertsimas D, Johnson M, Kallus N (2015) The power of optimization over randomization in designing experiments involving small samples. Oper. Res. 63(4):868–876.Link, Google Scholar
• Blackwell D, Hodges JL (1957) Design for the control of selection bias. Ann. Math. Statist. 28(2):449–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cambanis S, Huang S, Simons G (1981) On the theory of elliptically contoured distributions. J. Multivariate Anal. 11(3):368–385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chick SE, Frazier P (2012) Sequential sampling with economics of selection procedures. Management Sci. 58(3):550–569.Link, Google Scholar
• Chick SE, Gans N (2009) Economic analysis of simulation selection problems. Management Sci. 55(3):421–437.Link, Google Scholar
• Chick SE, Forster M, Pertile P (2017) A Bayesian decision theoretic model of sequential experimentation with delayed response. J. Royal Statist. Soc. Ser. B Statist. Methodology 79(5):1439–1462.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cook TD, Campbell DT, Day A (1979) Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings (Houghton Mifflin, Boston).Google Scholar
• Efron B (1971) Forcing a sequential experiment to be balanced. Biometrika 58(3):403–417.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fisher RA (1935) The Design of Experiments (Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, UK).Google Scholar
• Goemans MX, Williamson DP (1995) Improved approximation algorithms for maximum cut and satisfiability problems using semidefinite programming. J. ACM 42(6):1115–1145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Han B, Enas NH, McEntegart D (2009) Randomization by minimization for unbalanced treatment allocation. Statist. Medicine 28(27):3329–3346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hauser JR, Urban GL, Liberali G, Braun M (2009) Website morphing. Marketing Sci. 28(2):202–223.Link, Google Scholar
• Hu Y, Hu F (2012) Asymptotic properties of covariate-adaptive randomization. Ann. Statist. 40(3):1794–1815.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johari R, Pekelis L, Walsh DJ (2017) Always valid inference: Bringing sequential analysis to A/B testing. Working paper, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
• Kallus N (2013) Regression-robust designs of controlled experiments. Working paper, Cornell Tech, New York.Google Scholar
• Kapelner A, Krieger A (2014) Matching on-the-fly: Sequential allocation with higher power and efficiency. Biometrics 70(2):378–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kasy M (2016) Why experimenters should not randomize, and what they should do instead. Working paper, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Kim S-H, Nelson BL (2006) Selecting the best system. Henderson S, Nelson B, eds. Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science: Simulation, vol. 13 (North Holland, Amsterdam), 501–534.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova OM, Tymofyeyev Y (2012) Preserving the allocation ratio at every allocation with biased coin randomization and minimization in studies with unequal allocation. Statist. Medicine 31(8):701–723.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Langford J, Zhang T (2007) The epoch-greedy algorithm for contextual multi-armed bandits. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY), 1096–1103.Google Scholar
• Nesterov Y (1997) Semidefinite relaxation and nonconvex quadratic optimization. Technical report, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.Google Scholar
• Pocock SJ, Simon R (1975) Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 31(1):103–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pukelsheim F (2006) Optimal Design of Experiments (SIAM, Philadelphia).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raudenbush SW, Martinez A, Spybrook J (2007) Strategies for improving precision in group-randomized experiments. Ed. Evaluation Policy Anal. 29(1):5–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenberger WF, Sverdlov O (2008) Handling covariates in the design of clinical trials. Statist. Sci. 23(3):404–419.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwartz EM, Bradlow ET, Fader PS (2017) Customer acquisition via display advertising using multi-armed bandit experiments. Marketing Sci. 36(4):471–643.Link, Google Scholar
• Smith RL (1984a) Properties of biased coin designs in sequential clinical trials. Ann. Statist. 12(3):1018–1034.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith RL (1984b) Sequential treatment allocation using biased coin designs. J. Royal Statist. Soc. Ser. B 46(3):519–543.Google Scholar
• Steensma DP, Kantarjian HM (2014) Impact of cancer research bureaucracy on innovation, costs, and patient care. J. Clinical Oncology 32(5):376–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toubia O, Hauser JR, Simester DI (2004) Polyhedral methods for adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis. J. Marketing Res. 41(1):116–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toubia O, Simester DI, Hauser JR, Dahan E (2003) Fast polyhedral adaptive conjoint estimation. Marketing Sci. 22(3):273–303.Link, Google Scholar
• Woodroofe M (1979) A one-armed bandit problem with a concomitant variable. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 74(368):799–806.Crossref, Google Scholar