MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974652544 · doi:10.1115/1.1526508

Definition and Review of Virtual Prototyping

2002· article· en· W1974652544 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVirtual prototypingVirtual realityConfusionComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionRapid prototypingSoftware engineeringVirtual machineEngineeringEngineering drawingSystems engineeringSimulationProgramming languagePsychologyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual Prototyping (VP) technique has been interpreted in many different ways, which causes confusion and misunderstanding among researchers and practitioners. Based on a review of the current related research and application, this paper proposes a definition of VP as well as components of a virtual prototype. VP is then compared with and distinguished from virtual reality (VR), virtual environment (VE), and virtual manufacturing (VM) techniques. Given the proposed definition and review of VP, future VP related research topics are suggested.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it