If a Picture is Worth 1000 Words, Is a Word Worth 1000 Features for Design Metric Estimation?

被引:2
|
作者
Edwards, Kristen M. [1 ]
Peng, Aoran [2 ]
Miller, Scarlett R. [3 ]
Ahmed, Faez [1 ]
机构
[1] MIT, Dept Mech Engn, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[2] Penn State Univ, Dept Ind & Mfg Engn, State Coll, PA 16802 USA
[3] Penn State Univ, Engn Design & Ind Engn, State Coll, PA 16802 USA
关键词
artificial intelligence; creativity and concept generation; data-driven design; design evaluation; design representation; machine learning; natural language processing; product design; CONSENSUAL ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUE; PRODUCT ANALYSIS MATRIX; CONCEPTUAL DESIGN; CREATIVITY; VALIDATION; INNOVATION; MODEL; PERCEPTIONS; PERSONALITY; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1115/1.4053130
中图分类号
TH [机械、仪表工业];
学科分类号
0802 ;
摘要
A picture is worth a thousand words, and in design metric estimation, a word may be worth a thousand features. Pictures are awarded this worth because they can encode a plethora of information. When evaluating designs, we aim to capture a range of information as well, including usefulness, uniqueness, and novelty of a design. The subjective nature of these concepts makes their evaluation difficult. Still, many attempts have been made and metrics developed to do so, because design evaluation is integral to the creation of novel solutions. The most common metrics used are the consensual assessment technique (CAT) and the Shah, Vargas-Hernandez, and Smith (SVS) method. While CAT is accurate and often regarded as the "gold standard," it relies on using expert ratings, making CAT expensive and time-consuming. Comparatively, SVS is less resource-demanding, but often criticized as lacking sensitivity and accuracy. We utilize the complementary strengths of both methods through machine learning. This study investigates the possibility of using machine learning to predict expert creativity assessments from more accessible nonexpert survey results. The SVS method results in a text-rich dataset about a design. We utilize these textual design representations and the deep semantic relationships that words and sentences encode to predict more desirable design metrics, including CAT metrics. We demonstrate the ability of machine learning models to predict design metrics from the design itself and SVS survey information. We show that incorporating natural language processing (NLP) improves prediction results across design metrics, and that clear distinctions in the predictability of certain metrics exist. Our code and additional information about our work are available on the MIT DeCoDE Lab website.(1)
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] IF A PICTURE IS WORTH 1000 WORDS, IS A WORD WORTH 1000 FEATURES FOR DESIGN METRIC ESTIMATION?
    Edwards, Kristen M.
    Peng, Aoran
    Miller, Scarlett R.
    Ahmed, Faez
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF ASME 2021 INTERNATIONAL DESIGN ENGINEERING TECHNICAL CONFERENCES AND COMPUTERS AND INFORMATION IN ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, IDETC-CIE2021, VOL 6, 2021,
  • [2] A PICTURE IS WORTH A 1000 WORDS
    GOOD, PI
    [J]. COMPUTER DECISIONS, 1981, 13 (08): : 50 - 51
  • [3] A PICTURE IS WORTH 1000 WORDS
    MOONEY, T
    [J]. PLATING AND SURFACE FINISHING, 1992, 79 (03): : 42 - 43
  • [4] A Picture is Worth a 1000 Words?
    Dodani, Mahesh H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OBJECT TECHNOLOGY, 2006, 5 (02): : 35 - 40
  • [5] PICTURE WORTH A 1000 WORDS
    BIEBERLE, GF
    [J]. INFOSYSTEMS, 1982, 29 (10): : 6 - 6
  • [6] A PICTURE IS WORTH 1000 WORDS
    CLEVER, LH
    [J]. WESTERN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1995, 163 (05): : 485 - 485
  • [7] A PICTURE IS WORTH A 1000 WORDS
    SANFORD, PE
    [J]. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGE TEACHERS OF AGRICULTURE JOURNAL, 1980, 24 (03): : 31 - 32
  • [8] A Picture is Worth 1000 Words
    Lejay, Anne
    Chakfe, Nabil
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2020, 59 (06) : 982 - 982
  • [9] WHEN IS A PICTURE NOT WORTH 1000 WORDS
    WAUGH, D
    [J]. CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 1994, 151 (11) : 1632 - 1632
  • [10] A PICTURE REALLY IS WORTH 1000 WORDS
    HOUSLEY, CE
    [J]. HOSPITALS & HEALTH NETWORKS, 1994, 68 (03): : 8 - 8