A new approach for product cost estimation using data envelopment analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cost estimation of new products has always been difficult as only few design, manufacturing and operational features will be known. In these situations, parametric or non-parametric methods are commonly used to estimate the cost of a product given the corresponding cost drivers. The parametric models use priori determined cost function where the parameters of the function are evaluated from historical data. Non-parametric methods, on the other hand, attempt to fit curves to the historic data without predetermined function. In both methods, it is assumed that the historic data used in the analysis is a true representation of the relation between the cost drivers and the corresponding costs. However, because of efficiency variations of the manufacturers and suppliers, changes in supplier selections, market fluctuations, and several other reasons, certain costs in the historic data may be too high whereas other costs may represent better deals for their corresponding cost drivers. Thus, it may be important to rank the historic data and identify benchmarks and estimate the target costs of the product based on these benchmarks. In this paper, a novel adaptation of cost drivers and cost data is introduced in order to use data envelopment analysis for the purpose of ranking cost data and identify benchmarks, and then estimate the target costs of a new product based on these benchmarks. An illustrative case study has been presented for the cost estimation of landing gears of an aircraft manufactured by an aerospace company located in Montreal, CANADA.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".