MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604240147 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3833

A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR AN INTELLIGENT DESIGN CATALOGUE

2011· article· en· W2604240147 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Paul Winkelman, I. Yellowley

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObject-oriented programmingComputer scienceIntelligent designObject-oriented designProcess (computing)SoftwareSoftware engineeringEngineering design processObject (grammar)Engineering drawingSystems engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper outlines continuing work on the intelligent design catalogue. The intelligent design catalogue seeks to create a virtual design environment that is linked to a catalogue of standard parts. The theoretical framework for this research draws on several engineering areas. Within manufacturing, process plans can be developed in a virtual environment independently of the machines on the shop floor just as products can be conceptually designed independently of the standard parts available. The standard parts themselves can be grouped borrowing from classification schemes of Group Technology. Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) provides an environment for the development of the software that runs the intelligent design catalogue. As the objects of OOP parallel standard components, OOP also serves as a design paradigm after which the catalogue can be modelled. . Design theory suggests frameworks for developing a (semi-) hierarchical structure for cataloguing parts and design case studies offer insight into differences between novice and expert designers.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207