Distributed & conceptual CAD (DC-CAD) : a new software solution for product design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many computer aided design (CAD) software packages focus on detailed design and not on early stage, conceptual design.The ability to conceptualize and sketch early versions of a product solution is currently limited to paper and pencil or to inadequate computeraided industrial design programs (CAID) that focus mainly on surface design, not product design.Working on a design as a group also poses problems since the team can be geographically distributed.In an attempt to address the current inadequacies of CAD systems for distributed conceptual design, my thesis proposes a vision for a new CAD program, DC-CAD.This vision anticipates network-orientated conceptual design, and encompasses capabilities for multiple users to collaborate simultaneously on design, compare & evaluate concept sketches, comment on designs and merge changes from other designers, transfer data to detailed design CAD programs, and record concept changes over time.MIT's Product Engineering Class (2.009) was used as the basis for conceiving the software system.By analyzing design challenges that arose during the course, new software features are suggested to mitigate such problems.The end result is a clear vision for a new program, DC-CAD, and a storyboard example of how it could be used in a futuristic 2.009 setting.The thesis closes with recommendations on how to pursue the implementation and realization of such a CAD system.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".