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 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.022
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