Designing Structured Design Thinking Framework for Societal System Design in the Unknown Context
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently where everything has increased in complexity, systems designers such as a business model designer are challenged to solve ill-defined problems by creating innovations and designing societal systems. For handling such problems, design thinking has attracted attention as a methodology for solving "ill-defined" problems. However, design thinking cannot create innovations or design societal systems by itself because design thinking cannot guarantee reproducibility in a system design.In fact, design thinking is effective when applied to the systems approach process and when embedded in its processes. This paper proposes using the advantages of both design thinking and the systems approach to build a structured design thinking framework. This framework integrates the nonstructured design thinking process and the structured systems approach process. We used this framework to redesign a local community in Japan and to design a new concept of an aquarium. We further confirmed that this framework is effective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it