An imprecise goal programming approach for modeling design team's preferences in quality function deployment planning process
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
Abstract The Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is an approach that facilitates designing product by analyzing and projecting the Customer's Needs (CNs) in the Engineering Characteristics (ECs) of a product. The aim of QFD planning process is to determine the target levels for ECs of a product that achieve high level of overall customers' satisfaction. However, integrating design team's preferences in this preliminary stage of product design could make the design more realistic and could also avoid unfeasibility in posterior phases of the product development processes. Moreover, this process is performed within an imprecise environment, and more than one factor must be taken into account in determining targets levels of ECs; especially, the limited resources and increased market competition. This paper presents an imprecise goal programming approach to determine the best aspiration levels of ECs in QFD planning process. Based on benchmarking data of ECs, the concept of satisfaction functions will be utilized to integrate explicitly the design team's preferences and incorporate the competitive analysis of target market into the modelling and solution processes. In addition, the relationships linking CNs and ECs and the ECs to each other are integrated by functional relationships. The proposed approach will be illustrated through an example of product development of an emulsification dynamite packing machine. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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