Seeing the Past, Planning the Future: Proudly Celebrating 25 Years of Assisting the Convergence of Process Sciences and Design Science
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Extended Editorial has been compiled by the members of the Editorial Board to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, which operates as the Transactions of the Society for Process and Design Science. The paper divides in three parts. The first part provides a detailed overview of the preliminaries, the objectives, and the periods of operation. It also includes a summary of the current application-orientated professional fields of interests, which are: (i) convergence mechanisms of creative scientific disciplines, (ii) convergence of artificial intelligence, team and health science, (iii) convergence concerning next-generation cyber-physical systems, and (iv) convergence in design and engineering education. The second part includes invited papers, which exemplify domains within the four fields of interest, and also represent good examples of science communication. Short synopses of the contents of these representative papers are included. The third part takes the major changes in scientific research and the academic publication arena into consideration, circumscribes the mission and vision as formulated by the current Editorial Board, and elaborates on the planned strategic exploration and utilization domains of interest.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it