MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027504238 · doi:10.1504/ijpd.2007.012496

Manufacturing Process Management: iterative synchronisation of engineering data with manufacturing realities

2007· article· en· W2027504238 on OpenAlexaff
Clément Fortin, Gregory Huet

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Product Development · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcurrent engineeringProduct lifecycleDesign for manufacturabilityProduct engineeringSystems engineeringProduct data managementProcess development execution systemManufacturing execution systemManufacturing engineeringProduct designEngineeringCollaborative engineeringComputer-integrated manufacturingNew product developmentProduct managementProcess (computing)Computer scienceProduct (mathematics)Process integrationWork in processOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The principles of Concurrent Engineering (CE) have led to an early introduction of manufacturing decisions in the Product Development Process (PDP). Nevertheless, the integration along the product life cycle of computer tools to help engineers manage their tasks in the global market still suffers from a poor understanding of information requirements for the effective streamline of the design to production process. Manufacturing Process Management (MPM) is a strategy that supports formal communication between engineering and production in a virtual 3D environment. This paper outlines how MPM enables a real-time assessment of component manufacturability and a parallelisation of product design and manufacturing processes. The proposed scheme is dedicated to offer CE teams the answers to integrated change management issues through a digital collaborative environment. From a technological perspective, a MPM solution provides an intelligent bridge between the Computer-Aided Design/Product Data Management (CAD/PDM) and Enterprise Resource Planning/Manufacturing Execution System (ERP/MES) software with viable perspectives for complete Product Life cycle Management (PLM) packages and new Knowledge Management (KM) approaches.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations29
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Product DevelopmentSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207