Scalable Set-Based Design Optimization and Remanufacturing for Meeting Changing Requirements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Engineering design problems often have open-ended requirements, especially in the early stages of development. Set-based design is a paradigm for exploring, and keeping under consideration, several alternatives so that commitment to a single design can be delayed until requirements are settled. In addition, requirements may change over the lifetime of a component or a system. Novel manufacturing technologies enable designs to be remanufactured to meet changed requirements. By considering this capability during the set-based design optimization process, solutions can be scaled to meet evolving requirements and customer specifications even after commitment. Such an ability can also support a circular economy paradigm based on the return of used or discarded components and systems to working condition. We propose a set-based design methodology to obtain scalable optimal solutions that can satisfy changing requirements through remanufacturing. We first use design optimization and surrogate modeling to obtain parametric optimal designs. This set of parametric optimal designs is then reduced to scalable optimal designs by observing a set of transition rules for the manufacturing process used (additive or subtractive). The methodology is demonstrated by means of a structural aeroengine component that is remanufactured by direct energy deposition of a stiffener to meet higher loading requirements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".