MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313039739 · doi:10.1177/15589250221134350

An axiomatic design theory for design of apparel products

2022· article· en· W4313039739 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Zhao, Dahui Zhu, Feng Zhou, Jing Song, Wenjun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsAxiomatic designClothingAxiomPleasureProduct designDesigntheoryProduct (mathematics)Function (biology)Computer scienceEngineeringMathematicsHuman–computer interactionManufacturing engineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An apparel product has a unique feature other than other products in that apparel product design must consider three categories of design requirements, namely function (governed by natural sciences), comfort (governed by ergonomics), and pleasure (governed by aesthetics and psychology). This paper proposes a general design theory for apparel products. The theory is based on Axiomatic Design Theory (ADT), which is for the functional aspect of products, particularly by adapting ADT to apparel product design, to which all the aspects (function, comfort, pleasure) need to be considered. The proposed theory is thus called the Axiomatic Design Theory For Apparel (ADT-FA). The ADT-FA has two axioms. Axiom 1 (apparel) concerns coupling in the design requirement, and Axiom 2 (apparel) concerns redundancy in the design parameter. The proposed theory is preliminarily validated with the Zoot suit, which is well known in the community of apparel design. The work opens an avenue for more validations in future.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineered Fibers and FabricsSame topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207