工程设计中的相似性:基于知识的方法

Ashish M. Chaudhari, Ilias Bilionis, Jitesh H. Panchal
{"title":"工程设计中的相似性:基于知识的方法","authors":"Ashish M. Chaudhari, Ilias Bilionis, Jitesh H. Panchal","doi":"10.1115/detc2019-98272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Similarity assessment is a cognitive activity that pervades engineering design practice, research, and education. There has been a significant effort in understanding similarity in cognitive science, and some recent efforts on quantifying the similarity of design problems in the engineering design community. However, there is a lack of approaches for measuring similarity in engineering design that embody the characteristics identified in cognitive science, and accounts for the nature of design activities, particularly in the embodiment design phase where scientific knowledge plays a significant role. To address this gap, we present an approach for measuring the similarity among design problems. The approach consists of (i) modeling knowledge using probabilistic graphical models, (ii) modeling the functional mapping between design characteristics and the performance measures relevant in a particular context, and (iii) modeling the dissimilarity using KL-divergence in the performance space. We illustrate the approach using an example of a parametric shaft design for fatigue, which is typically a part of mechanical engineering design curricula, and test the validity of the approach using an experiment study involving 167 student subjects. The results indicate that the proposed approach can capture the well-documented characteristics of similarity, including directionality, context dependence, individual-specificity, and its dynamic nature. The approach is general enough that it can be extended further for assessing the similarity of design problems for analogical design, for assessing the similarity of experimental design tasks to real design settings, and for evaluating the similarity between design problems in educational settings.","PeriodicalId":143350,"journal":{"name":"Volume 7: 31st International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Similarity in Engineering Design: A Knowledge-Based Approach\",\"authors\":\"Ashish M. Chaudhari, Ilias Bilionis, Jitesh H. Panchal\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/detc2019-98272\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Similarity assessment is a cognitive activity that pervades engineering design practice, research, and education. There has been a significant effort in understanding similarity in cognitive science, and some recent efforts on quantifying the similarity of design problems in the engineering design community. However, there is a lack of approaches for measuring similarity in engineering design that embody the characteristics identified in cognitive science, and accounts for the nature of design activities, particularly in the embodiment design phase where scientific knowledge plays a significant role. To address this gap, we present an approach for measuring the similarity among design problems. The approach consists of (i) modeling knowledge using probabilistic graphical models, (ii) modeling the functional mapping between design characteristics and the performance measures relevant in a particular context, and (iii) modeling the dissimilarity using KL-divergence in the performance space. We illustrate the approach using an example of a parametric shaft design for fatigue, which is typically a part of mechanical engineering design curricula, and test the validity of the approach using an experiment study involving 167 student subjects. The results indicate that the proposed approach can capture the well-documented characteristics of similarity, including directionality, context dependence, individual-specificity, and its dynamic nature. The approach is general enough that it can be extended further for assessing the similarity of design problems for analogical design, for assessing the similarity of experimental design tasks to real design settings, and for evaluating the similarity between design problems in educational settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":143350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Volume 7: 31st International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Volume 7: 31st International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2019-98272\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 7: 31st International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2019-98272","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

相似度评估是一种普遍存在于工程设计实践、研究和教育中的认知活动。认知科学在理解相似性方面做出了重大努力,最近工程设计界在量化设计问题的相似性方面做出了一些努力。然而,缺乏测量工程设计相似性的方法,这些方法体现了认知科学中确定的特征,并说明了设计活动的性质,特别是在体现设计阶段,科学知识起着重要作用。为了解决这一差距,我们提出了一种测量设计问题之间相似性的方法。该方法包括(i)使用概率图形模型对知识进行建模,(ii)对设计特征与特定背景下相关性能度量之间的功能映射进行建模,以及(iii)使用性能空间中的KL-divergence对差异性进行建模。我们以机械工程设计课程中典型的疲劳参数化轴设计为例说明了该方法,并通过涉及167名学生的实验研究验证了该方法的有效性。结果表明,该方法能够捕捉到已有文献记载的相似性特征,包括方向性、上下文依赖性、个体特异性及其动态性。该方法是足够普遍的,它可以进一步扩展到评估类比设计的设计问题的相似性,评估实验设计任务与实际设计设置的相似性,以及评估教育设置中设计问题之间的相似性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Similarity in Engineering Design: A Knowledge-Based Approach
Similarity assessment is a cognitive activity that pervades engineering design practice, research, and education. There has been a significant effort in understanding similarity in cognitive science, and some recent efforts on quantifying the similarity of design problems in the engineering design community. However, there is a lack of approaches for measuring similarity in engineering design that embody the characteristics identified in cognitive science, and accounts for the nature of design activities, particularly in the embodiment design phase where scientific knowledge plays a significant role. To address this gap, we present an approach for measuring the similarity among design problems. The approach consists of (i) modeling knowledge using probabilistic graphical models, (ii) modeling the functional mapping between design characteristics and the performance measures relevant in a particular context, and (iii) modeling the dissimilarity using KL-divergence in the performance space. We illustrate the approach using an example of a parametric shaft design for fatigue, which is typically a part of mechanical engineering design curricula, and test the validity of the approach using an experiment study involving 167 student subjects. The results indicate that the proposed approach can capture the well-documented characteristics of similarity, including directionality, context dependence, individual-specificity, and its dynamic nature. The approach is general enough that it can be extended further for assessing the similarity of design problems for analogical design, for assessing the similarity of experimental design tasks to real design settings, and for evaluating the similarity between design problems in educational settings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信