MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020316515 · doi:10.1115/detc2009-86067

Why Systematic Design Engineering?

2009· article· en· W2020316515 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 8: 14th Design for Manufacturing and the Life Cycle Conference; 6th Symposium on International Design and Design Education; 21st International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, Parts A and B · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEngineering design processTraceabilityContext (archaeology)Design scienceField (mathematics)Process (computing)Management scienceCreativityAction (physics)Software engineeringKnowledge managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design engineering is different from other more artistic forms of designing because on one hand it is more constrained by the engineering sciences, economics and other factors, but on the other hand it has more possibilities for abstract modeling in the conceptual phases. Creativity is essential, but in many cases not sufficient to explore the many possible candidate solutions. A more systematic and methodical approach can help to overcome many of the problems that arise during conceptualizing in design engineering. Use of appropriate methods to enhance the search for solutions can expand the solution field. A systematic approach based on engineering design science has been shown to enhance understanding, good record-keeping, and traceability for the design process. Several grounded theories are reviewed and brought into mutual context, they refer to memory and thinking operations, expertise, human action modes, and competencies. The discussion reveals a need for specific instructions for a methodical and systematic engineering design procedure, when the design problem is seen as non-routine, and expertise is lacking.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.231 · 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