MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046653691 · doi:10.1080/09544820701376654

Parameter design considering the impact of design changes on downstream processes based upon the Taguchi method

2008· article· en· W2046653691 on OpenAlexaff
Deyi Xue, S. Y. Cheing, Peng Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Design · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaguchi methodsDownstream (manufacturing)Design of experimentsEngineering design processProcess (computing)Probabilistic designEstimation theoryEngineeringNoise (video)Pipeline (software)Process variableDesign processReliability engineeringComputer scienceMathematicsWork in processMechanical engineeringStatisticsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research introduces a new systematic approach for parameter design considering the impact of design changes on downstream processes. In this approach, design parameters with potential changes are modelled as noise parameters, while design parameters without potential changes are described as controllable parameters. The Taguchi method is employed to identify the robust design whose downstream process is the least sensitive to design parameter value changes. Since design parameter changes are usually associated with probabilities, the Taguchi method is modified in this research considering the probabilities of noise parameters. Estimation of potential process change cost due to potential design parameter value changes is also studied. A case study in pipeline engineering design and construction has been conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of this new parameter design approach.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering DesignSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207