MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765309949 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v8n7p1

An Accuracy Investigation of Product Cost Estimation in Automotive Die Manufacturing

2017· article· en· W2765309949 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julia Bendul, Vasile Apostu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCost estimateComputer scienceAutomotive industryCost reductionEstimationCost driverProcess (computing)Manufacturing engineeringProduction (economics)Industrial engineeringRelevant costManufacturing costProduct (mathematics)Total costReliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessSystems engineeringEngineeringEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automotive die manufacturers face the constant challenge of producing qualitative products while having to reduce costs. However, cost reduction measures are rather insignificant during the actual manufacturing process as the most important cost-impacting decisions are taken during the design phase. Cost estimation methods attempt to determine the production cost already in the design phase; the cost can be broken down and therefore the plan times of manufacturing processes can be pre-calculated, thus enabling early capacity decisions. Many researchers have been focusing for decades on developing efficient cost estimation methods. Yet their scarce access to cost information meant that most of the developed methods could not be evaluated with real data and thus their implementation in practice being challenged. This paper reviews and classifies cost estimation methods and investigates the accuracy of the estimate based onpractical application in 190 cases. The overall aim is to determine the accuracy level of the studied methods in practice and therefore identify their application fields.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207