MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992694907 · doi:10.1109/iccse.2014.6926443

A systematic approach for functional decomposition of mechatronic system design using mechatronic design quotient (MDQ)

2014· article· en· W1992694907 on OpenAlexaff
Hani Balkhair, Clarence W. de Silva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechatronicsConceptual designProcess (computing)Engineering design processComputer scienceSystems engineeringComputer-automated designDesign processDecompositionDesign methodsIdentification (biology)Control engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringSystems designWork in processHuman–computer interactionMechanical engineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Engineering, designers encounter many challenges due to the increasing complexity of mechatronic systems and the presence of multiple domains and stringent functionality. The elimination of different design alternatives in an early phase without the need for more detail is a common practice. The huge search space makes the identification of design concepts a tedious process. In this paper, a systematic methodology is presented to facilitate the relationship between the functional requirements and conceptual design solutions. Mechatronic design quotient (MDQ), which represents the “goodness” of a mechatronic design, is used to help facilitate the decision-making process of the conceptual solutions. A case study of the design of an electro-mechanical conveyor system is presented to illustrate the proposed methodology.

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 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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207