MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992553170 · doi:10.1243/09544054jem1387

Adaptable design: Concepts, methods, and applications

2009· article· en· W1992553170 on OpenAlexaff
Peihua Gu, Deyi Xue, A.Y.C. Nee

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering Manufacture · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesign technologyModular designProduct designSystems engineeringPersonalizationComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringProduct (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)Design review (U.S. government)EngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessOperations managementProduct testingWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing competition in the global marketplace demands products with better functionality, higher quality, lower cost, shorter delivery lead time, and increased environmental friendliness. Although advanced manufacturing technologies can partially address these challenges, advanced design technologies are considered critical, since most design and manufacturing properties of a product are influenced by the design decisions made in the early design stages. This paper provides a comprehensive review on a new design paradigm — adaptable design — that aims at developing adaptable products to satisfy the various requirements of customers. The topics discussed in this review include the fundamental concepts, objectives, methodologies, and applications. The paper also presents the differences between adaptable design and other design methods, such as modular design, platform design, and product customization. The focus is on mechanical product design; however, potential applications of adaptable design in other disciplines are also briefly mentioned.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations109
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering ManufactureSame topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207