MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751932443 · doi:10.1080/14606925.2017.1352982

Desirability in design for safety: Developing life jacket through creative problem solving method of TRIZ

2017· article· en· W2751932443 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shahin Matin, Mohammad Hossein Namayandegi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Design Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRIZProduct (mathematics)Process (computing)UsabilityProduct designNew product developmentOrder (exchange)EngineeringArchitectural engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceManufacturing engineeringMarketingBusinessHuman–computer interactionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drowning is one of the main causes of death worldwide and according to the recent statistics published by coast guards of the US, Canada, and UK, most of drowned people were not using a life jacket. The main reason to refuse wearing a lifejacket considered being undesirable design of current samples.This project intended to develop more desirable product and in order to achieve this goal, some of the main TRIZ tools were utilized in five phases of product development process. Moreover, in order to examine our hypothesis, different studies on behavioural factors associated with life jacket use were reviewed and this became clear which boaters avoid wearing life jackets due to its bulky, uncomfortable and restrictive design. The product appearance and usefulness also were questioned by some boaters, when they indicated life jacket is just suitable for weak swimmers.Final result of this project presented in form of a concept which grants user's needs in both normal and emergency situations and makes it beneficial in all phases of the product using process. This concept combines life jacket, shoulder bag, smartphones capabilities and survival kit in one product to improve product desirability, usability and also its appearance.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: Other design
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Design JournalSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207