scholarly journals Using Dependency and Structure Modeling (DSM) for Temporal Decision Making in Set-Based Design (SBD)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Horton Rapp ◽  
Gary Witus
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Structure Modeling ◽  
Set Based Design

scholarly journals A Utilitarian Decision—Making Approach for Front End Design—A Systematic Literature Review

Buildings ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 34
Author(s):  
Joas Serugga ◽  
Mike Kagioglou ◽  
Patricia Tzortzopolous
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Quality Function Deployment ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Visual Methods ◽  
Front End ◽  
Multi Attribute Utility Theory ◽  
Limited Application ◽  
Set Based Design

The complexity of construction processes often means interaction between various stakeholders, activities and tasks in order to deliver the expected outcomes. The intensity and dynamics of front-end design (FED) mean decision techniques and methods are important in supporting projects benefits delivery more importantly those based on utility of decision making. This paper explores a new utilitarian decision-making approach based on a systematic literature review of FED decision making. It presents the state of the art in design decision making concepts and analysis of tools over the last 10 years (2009–2019). From a total of 111 peer-reviewed journal papers, fifteen decision-making techniques are identified as dominant in design decision making, broadly grouped in four major categories as explanatory/rational, Multi Criteria Decision Making techniques (MCDM), Hybrid and Visual methods. The review finds that the most applied of the MCDM is Quality Function Deployment (QFD); while among the rational/explanatory techniques is set-based design (SBD). While there is limited application of Multi Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) in decision making, the paper finds that the robust consistency and structured approach better captures the intricate dynamics of FED; including modelling of the subjectivity, interdependences and uncertainty in design discourse.

scholarly journals Set-Based Thinking in the Engineering Design Community and Beyond

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sourobh Ghosh ◽  
Warren Seering
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Product Development ◽  
Engineering Design ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Concurrent Engineering ◽  
Theoretical Construct ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Academic Communities ◽  
The World ◽  
Set Based Design

Since a series of academic case studies had revealed Toyota’s unique product development practices to the world, a flurry of research has been conducted into set-based design, also known as set-based concurrent engineering. In this paper, we review work related to set-based design across academic communities in efforts to find common themes and influences. After a review of this literature, we inductively arrive at two Principles of Set-Based Thinking: considering sets of distinct alternatives concurrently and delaying convergent decision making. These Principles allow us to articulate a working description of set-based design. We then examine these two Principles at work in a case example of a common theoretical construct in design.

A Set-Based Approach to Support Decision-Making on the Restoration of Infrastructure Networks

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 781-801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehmet Unal ◽  
Gordon P. Warn
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Design Space ◽  
Reduction Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Multiple Stakeholders ◽  
Infrastructure Networks ◽  
Space Design ◽  
Network Operations ◽  
Set Based Design ◽  
Extent Of Damage

Infrastructure networks can be damaged during earthquakes. These damaged links can disrupt network operations resulting in significant economic and social losses. Depending on the distribution and extent of damage, and constraints on resources, decision-makers must decide how best to restore a network. Their aim is typically to minimize impacts to the community while negotiating competing objectives of multiple stakeholders, for example, minimizing costs, travel delays and environmental impacts. Thus, restoration decision-making is necessarily complex requiring input from multiple stakeholders throughout the decision-making process. Much of the literature has adopted point-based approaches to restoration whereby algorithms are used to identify solution(s) without broad exploration of the design space. In this paper, a set-based approach is developed following the “Design by Shopping” paradigm in which a full enumeration of restoration designs is generated and visualized allowing decision-makers to broadly “shop” the design space and eliminate the worst designs based on evolving preferences. The merits of set-based design are broad exploration of the design space, design freedom in the initial stages of decision–making, and applying constraints throughout the set-reduction process.

Technology Characterization Models and Their Use in Systems Design

2014 ◽  
Vol 136 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert R. Parker ◽  
Edgar Galvan ◽  
Richard J. Malak
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Systems Engineering ◽  
Systems Design ◽  
Computational Effort ◽  
Engineering Problem ◽  
Component Technology ◽  
System Level ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Engineering Project ◽  
Set Based Design

Prior research suggests that set-based design representations can be useful for facilitating collaboration among engineers in a design project. However, existing set-based methods are limited in terms of how the sets are constructed and in their representational capability. The focus of this article is on the problem of modeling the capabilities of a component technology in a way that can be communicated and used in support of system-level decision making. The context is the system definition phases of a systems engineering project, when engineers still are considering various technical concepts. The approach under investigation requires engineers familiar with the component- or subsystem-level technologies to generate a set-based model of their achievable technical attributes, called a technology characterization model (TCM). Systems engineers then use these models to explore system-level alternatives and choose the combination of technologies that are best suited to the design problem. Previously, this approach was shown to be theoretically sound from a decision making perspective under idealized circumstances. This article is an investigation into the practical effectiveness of different TCM representational methods under realistic conditions such as having limited data. A power plant systems engineering problem is used as an example, with TCMs generated for different technical concepts for the condenser component. Samples of valid condenser realizations are used as inputs to the TCM representation methods. Two TCM representation methods are compared based on their solution accuracy and computational effort required: a Kriging-based interpolation and a machine learning technique called support vector domain description (SVDD). The results from this example hold that the SVDD-based method provides the better combination of accuracy and efficiency.

Discarding optimality: Throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Reward Rate ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Standard Observer ◽  
Rate Maximization ◽  
Reward Rate Maximization ◽  
Descriptive Standard ◽  
Observer Model

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.

LPCD framework: Analytical tool or psychological model?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Danks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytical Tool ◽  
Mathematical Framework ◽  
Bayesian Decision ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Model ◽  
Psychological Reality ◽  
Psychological Theories ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Bayesian Decision Making

AbstractThe target article uses a mathematical framework derived from Bayesian decision making to demonstrate suboptimal decision making but then attributes psychological reality to the framework components. Rahnev & Denison's (R&D) positive proposal thus risks ignoring plausible psychological theories that could implement complex perceptual decision making. We must be careful not to slide from success with an analytical tool to the reality of the tool components.

Elaborating the role of reflection and individual differences in the study of folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Behavioral Responses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Economic Beliefs

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.

The primacy of conscious decision making – ERRATUM

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conscious Decision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document