MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A two-phase hybrid product design algorithm using learning vector quantization, design of experiments, and adaptive neuro-fuzzy interface systems to optimize geometric form in view of customers’ opinions

2021· article· en· W3173839762 on OpenAlexaff
Hamid Haghshenas Gorgani, Ehsan Partovi, Mohammad Ali Soleimanpour, Seyed Mohammad Abtahi, Alireza Jahantigh Pak

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Computational Mechanics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProduct designCustomer satisfactionProduct (mathematics)Fuzzy logicIndustrial engineeringNew product developmentFeature (linguistics)Process (computing)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most important characteristics of a modern product is the extent to which it meets the needs of customers to gain market share. The conceptual design methods of products based on customer requirements are often feature-based, in which several features are identified between different types of a product. According to customer demands, these features are tuned and the closest is selected as the optimum. The great variety of features of a present-day product can often make this difficult because finding these common features is very complicated or even impossible. To solve this problem, choosing the optimal design is divided into two phases: In the first phase, the main product is divided into some basic categories and according to the customers' opinion, one is selected as the category. In the second phase, the selection of common geometrical features between the members of the winning category is made. Then, the optimization process is done based on customer rating and the closest design to the mentioned rating is selected. The house light switch is used as a case study and the proposed algorithm is implemented on it. High customer satisfaction with the optimized final design, high response rate to survey forms, and the low number of incompatible data, all, indicate the suitability of the proposed algorithm with human interface characteristics, simplicity and efficiency in adapting the product to the customers' view. This method can be used for other industrial products and even for non-industrial products or services.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Computational MechanicsSame topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207