4.6 Article

A Knowledge-Based Method for Rapid Design Concept Evaluation

期刊

IEEE ACCESS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 116835-116847

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2933544

关键词

Concept evaluation; configuration flow graph; feasibility; Naive Bayesian classifier; neural network; novelty

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51505032]
  2. Beijing Natural Science Foundation (BJNSF) [3172028]
  3. National Minister Project of China [JCKY2018204B053]
  4. Fundamental Research Support from Beijing Institute of Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Concept generation is one of the most critical steps in product design process. Recently, several computational tools for automatically generating design concepts were developed, which can generate a big number of design concepts. This brings a new challenge to traditional expert-based design concept evaluation methods since experts are not capable of evaluating a large number of design concept in a short time. Therefore, this work develops a knowledge-based method to roughly evaluation design concepts and elect a small number of design concepts for expert-based evaluation. In the proposed method, a knowledge base containing 100 design concepts extracted from existing products is constructed, and four features, including Number of Function (#F), Function Compatibility Index (FCI), Function Component Mapping Index (FCMI) and Component Compatibility Index (CCI) are de fined for building evaluation models. Based on the knowledge base and features, several computational evaluation models are developed including novelty evaluation model (NEM), feasibility discrimination model (FDM) and feasibility evaluation model (FEM). Empirical results show the proposed method is capable of evaluating design concepts. This work makes two-fold contributes to the research community, the first is a manually constructed knowledge base is published, while the second is four features are defined and used to define design concept evaluation models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据