Modeling and quantifying uncertainty in the product design phase for effects of user preference changes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to quantify external and internal uncertainties in product design process. The research addresses the measure of product future changes. Design/methodology/approach – Two methods are proposed to model and quantify uncertainty in the product life cycle. Changes of user preferences are considered as the external uncertainty. Changes stemming from dependencies between components are addressed as the internal uncertainty. Both methods use developed mechanisms to capture and treat changes of user preferences. An agent-based model is developed to simulate sociotechnical events in the product life cycle for the external uncertainty. An innovative application of Big Data Analytics (BDA) is proposed to evaluate the external and internal uncertainties in product design. The methods can identify the most affected product components under uncertainty. Findings – The results show that the proposed method could identify product changes during its life cycle, particularly using the proposed BDA method. Practical implications – It is essential for manufacturers in the competitive market to know their product changes under uncertainty. Proposed methods have potential to optimize design parameters in complex environments. Originality/value – This research bridges the gap of literature in the accurate estimation of uncertainty. The research integrates the change prediction and change transferring, applies data management methods innovatively, and utilizes the proposed methods practically.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it