Computer modelling of design specifications
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a new object-oriented generic model that, together with a new method, supports specification of product needs and mapping of influencing surrounding factors. The goal of the method is that individuals involved shall be able to handle and view more information related to concept selection and thereby be able to make more accurate decisions. A direct link to downstream product testing and the possibility to highlight conflicting criteria at an early stage is also desirable. The model is applicable both for new design and re-design tasks. It has, however, so far only been tested in re-design of an existing product, and it has been developed while collecting information about that particular problem. Specification handling of today often results in large and 'hard-to-grasp' quantities of paper documents. The research goal in this work has been to create a specification model for the future, which will be handled by computer tools and provides relevant information to the right user at the right time. Its has been implemented using the commercial METIS Software (NCR Metis, 1995).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it