MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239711789 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14669190

Computational intelligence in product design engineering: review and trends

2021· preprint· en· W4239711789 on OpenAlexaff
Filippo A. Salustri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProduct designComputer-automated designAutomationProduct (mathematics)Computational intelligenceDomain (mathematical analysis)Field (mathematics)New product developmentEngineering design processManagement scienceSystems engineeringSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringSystems design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Product design engineering is undergoing a transformation from informal and largely experience-based discipline to a science-based domain. Computational intelligence offers models and algorithms that can contribute greatly to design formalization and automation. This paper surveys computational intelligence concepts and approaches applicable to product design engineering. Taxonomy of the surveyed literature is presented according to the generally recognized areas in both product design engineering and computational intelligence. Some research issues that arise from the broad perspective presented in the paper have been signaled but not fully pursued. No survey of such a broad field can be complete, however, the material presented in the paper is a summary of state-of-the-art computational intelligence concepts and approaches in product design engineering. Keywords: Computational intelligence, engineering design, product engineering, decision making, design automation

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207