MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413735314 · doi:10.1017/pds.2025.10226

Integrative and Integrated product and production system development: a taxonomy for managing dependencies and processes

2025· article· en· W4413735314 on OpenAlexaff
Jan-Philipp Disselkamp, Tobias Seidenberg, Jonas Lick, Lukas Ptock, Fabian Wyrwich, Aschot Hovemann, Roman Dumitrescu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Design Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaxonomy (biology)Computer scienceProcess managementProduction (economics)Product (mathematics)Production system (computer science)BusinessEcologyMathematicsBiologyProcess (computing)Programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: The increasing complexity of modern product and production system development, driven by dynamic market demands, supply chain disruptions and economic pressures, poses significant challenges for companies. Existing methodologies often fall short due to their domain-specific focus, inconsistent terminology and lack of integration. To address these challenges, this paper presents a taxonomy for integrative product and production system development. The taxonomy systematically structures key elements, dependencies and processes to improve collaboration, decision-making and communication within organisations. Developed iteratively the taxonomy identifies ten core artefacts. It enables organisations to better plan improvements, synchronise development processes, and select appropriate methods and tools.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0130.012
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.014
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Design SocietySame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207