MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300012195 · doi:10.52842/conf.acadia.2012.067

Synthesizing Design Performance: An Evolutionary Approach to Multidisciplinary Design Search

2012· article· en· W4300012195 on OpenAlexafffund
David Gerber, Shih-Hsin Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueACADIA quarterly · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAutodesk
KeywordsComputer scienceGenerative DesignEngineering design processDesign space explorationProbabilistic designFlexibility (engineering)Management sciencePopulationMultidisciplinary approachComputer-automated designDesign processParametric statisticsIndustrial engineeringEvolutionary algorithmSystems designArtificial intelligenceSoftware engineeringEngineeringWork in process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design is a goal oriented decision-making activity. Design is ill defined and requiring of synthetic approaches to weighing and understanding tradeoffs amongst soft and hard objectives, and the imprecise and or computationally explicit criteria and goals. In this regard designers in contemporary practice face a crisis of sorts. How do we achieve performance under large degrees of uncertainty and limited design cycle time? How do we better design for integrating performance? Fundamentally design teams, are not typically given enough time nor the best tools to design explore, to generate design alternatives, and then evolve solution quality to search for best fit through expansive design solution spaces. Given the complex criteria for defining performance in architecture our research approach experiments upon an evolutionary and integrative computational strategy to expand the solution space of a design problem as well as pre-sort and qualify candidate designs. We present technology and methodology that supports rapid development of design problem solution spaces in which three design domains objectives have multi-directional impact on each other. The research describes the use of an evolutionary approach in which a genetic algorithm is used as a means to automate the design alternative population as well as to facilitate multidisciplinary design domain optimization. The paper provides a technical description of the prototype design, one that integrates associative parametric modeling with an energy use intensity evaluation and with a financial pro forma. The initial results of the research are presented and analyzed including impacts on design process; the impacts on design uncertainty and design cycle latency; and the affordances for ‘designing-in’ performance and managing project complexity. A summary discussion is developed which describes a future cloud implementation and the future extensions into other domains, scales, tectonic and system detail.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACADIA quarterlySame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207