MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062180983 · doi:10.1080/09544828.2012.709607

New dependency model and biological analogy for integrating product design for variety with market requirements

2012· article· en· W2062180983 on OpenAlexaff
Hoda ElMaraghy, Tarek AlGeddawy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Design · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModularity (biology)Variety (cybernetics)Product designComputer scienceDependency (UML)Component (thermodynamics)Modular designNew product developmentProduct (mathematics)Product design specificationRedundancy (engineering)Systems engineeringIndustrial engineeringSoftware engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsProgramming languageMarketingBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variety in product design is a result of diversity of needs in different domains and market segments. The two-way interaction and dependency between product design features and customer requirements is analogous to co-evolution in nature, where two groups of different species evolve to co-exist. A new method for designing products, families and platforms by recognising commonalities and core features, using the concept of co-evolution, is introduced in this paper. Cladistics is used to identify product component modules which correspond to common regional market requirements. Algorithms for functional and structural analysis as well as product variants generation have been developed. Complex dependency interactions and modularity relationships are modelled using liaison graphs and cladograms. A case study of washing machines is detailed and used to validate this novel application of the co-evolution dependency model in product families and platform design, demonstrating its use in the world of artefacts co-development. The proposed model is capable of satisfying different market segments’ requirements, while minimising the cost associated with product variety, by promoting modular product family design. It selects the best product variant(s) for each market segment and minimises component redundancy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering DesignSame topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207