MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155090552 · doi:10.1243/09544054jem655

A systematic approach for the robust design of scalable product platforms

2006· article· en· W2155090552 on OpenAlexaff
M H Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering Manufacture · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityCompromiseProduct designComputer scienceProduct engineeringNew product developmentProduct design specificationProduct (mathematics)Competitive advantageTime to marketProcess (computing)Manufacturing engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringReliability engineeringEngineeringBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today's highly competitive and volatile market, companies are trying to bring their products to the market faster in order to maintain a competitive advantage. One of the strategies is to develop common product platforms for rapid new product development. The objective of this research is to develop a scalable product platform robust design (SPPRD) framework that can assist companies in creating product platforms quickly and efficiently. The essential of this framework is to infuse the robust design concept into the product platform design process. Two objectives of robust design - achieving performance targets and minimizing performance variation are evaluated in the Compromise Decision Support Problem (Compromise-DSP) model. This SPPRD framework is demonstrated with the design of a tube-fin evaporator platform.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.172
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering ManufactureSame topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207