MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168974442 · doi:10.1504/ijcat.2006.010085

A constraint-based product configurator for mass customisation

2006· article· en· W2168974442 on OpenAlexaff
Helen Xie, Philip Henderson, Michael Kernahan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Applications in Technology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfiguratorComputer scienceFlexibility (engineering)Domain (mathematical analysis)Product (mathematics)Constraint (computer-aided design)Software engineeringProduct designKey (lock)Product design specificationSystems engineeringGeneralityEngineeringMathematicsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To stay competitive, many manufacturers have to adapt their business models to mass customisation, which enables customers to order customised products tailored to their specific needs. One of the key enabling technologies for the successful implementation of mass customisation is the product configurator, a software tool that automatically generates the customised product designs based on the customer requirements and design constraints. A constraint-based product configurator has advantages of flexibility and generality in product modelling and problem solving. Its ability to deal with discrete constraints has been well studied. However, the requirement for handling numeric constraints expressed as mathematical formulas posts a new challenge. This paper proposes a constraint model for n-ary numeric constraints and effective search algorithms. It also presents a system design approach on modelling domain-specific product knowledge, integrating the domain-specific product models into generic search algorithms and presenting configuration results to the end users.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computer Applications in TechnologySame topicConstraint Satisfaction and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207