MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164853248 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.2004.1401391

Aesthetic design for automobile interiors: critical issues and conceptual framework

2005· article· en· W2164853248 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFocus (optics)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Conceptual designDesign processEngineering design processHuman–computer interactionArchitectural engineeringEngineeringWork in processMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses aesthetic design with a focus on the application of vehicle interiors. First of all, aesthetic design is clawed. Second, some relevant studies on general aesthetic design as well as more specialized aesthetic design for vehicles are reviewed. Some problems are identified in the existing approaches. Two critical issues are observed, namely (1) what should be the model for a design process, which incorporates the aesthetic aspects for the vehicle interiors, and (2) what should be the knowledge base to support the model. Finally, we propose some ideas to address these issues and elaborate on the steps toward the implementation of these ideas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207