This application provides exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, classical test theory, unidimensional and multidimensional item response theory, and continuous item response model analysis, through the 'shiny' interactive interface. In addition,  it offers rich functionalities for visualizing and downloading results. Users can download figures, tables, and analysis reports via the interactive interface.

Finding the best values for user-specified arguments of a prediction algorithm can be difficult, particularly if there is an interaction between argument levels. This package automates the testing of any user-defined prediction algorithm over an arbitrary number of arguments. It includes functions for testing the algorithm over the given arguments with respect to an arbitrary number of user-defined diagnostics, visualising the results of these tests, and finding the optimal argument combinations with respect to each diagnostic.

A common way of validating a biological assay for is through a
    procedure, where m levels of an analyte are measured with n replicates at each
    level, and if all m estimates of the coefficient of variation (CV) are less
    than some prespecified level, then the assay is declared validated for precision
    within the range of the m analyte levels. Two limitations of this procedure are:
    there is no clear statistical statement of precision upon passing, and it is
    unclear how to modify the procedure for assays with constant standard deviation.
    We provide tools to convert such a procedure into a set of m hypothesis tests.
    This reframing motivates the m:n:q procedure, which upon completion delivers
    a 100q% upper confidence limit on the CV. Additionally, for a post-validation
    assay output of y, the method gives an ``effective standard deviation interval''
    of log(y) plus or minus r, which is a 68% confidence interval on log(mu), where
    mu is the expected value of the assay output for that sample. Further, the m:n:q
    procedure can be straightforwardly applied to constant standard deviation assays.
    We illustrate these tools by applying them to a growth inhibition assay. This is
    an implementation of the methods described in Fay, Sachs, and Miura (2018) 
    <doi:10.1002/sim.7528>.