A Novel Approach to Quantifying Designer’s Mental Stress in the Conceptual Design Process
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
The objective of this paper is to quantify designer’s mental stress during the conceptual design process. Quantifying the designer’s mental stress would assist the effort of understanding the designer’s creative and innovative process. In this paper, Recursive Object Modelling (ROM) is used as a formal tool to represent the designer’s mental state in each step of the conceptual design process. During the conceptual design process, designers usually describe the design states using natural language, combined with sketches. The description based on natural language will be transformed into ROM diagram through the lexical, syntactic, and structure analysis. A cognitive experiment, which is to design a new litter-disposal system in a passenger compartment located in the trains of NS (Dutch Railways), is built to study designer’s thinking process. ROM is used to analyze and quantify the designer’s mental stress based on the protocol data collected in the experiment. The validation through the cognitive experiment shows that ROM is an efficient design evaluation methodology, which reflects the nature and the characteristics of the design process. The designer’s mental stress presents dynamic, nonlinear, and spiral trend.
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