An approach to the extraction of preference-related information from design team language

The process of selecting among design alternatives is an important activity in the early stages of design. A designer is said to express design preferences when assigning priorities to a set of possible design choices. However, the assignment of preferences becomes more challenging on both a practical and theoretical level when performed by a group. This paper presents a probabilistic approach for estimating a team’s overall preference-related information known as preferential probabilities that extracts information from the natural language used in team discussion transcripts without aggregation of individual team member opinions. Assessment of the method is conducted by surveying a design team to obtain quantitative ratings of alternatives. Two different approaches are applied to convert these ratings into values that may be compared to the results of transcript analysis: the application of a modified Logit model and simulation based on the principle of maximum entropy. The probabilistic approach proposed in the paper represents how likely a choice is to be “most preferred” by a design team over a given period of time. A preliminary design selection experiment was conducted as an illustrative case example of the method. Correlations were found between the preferential probabilities estimated from transcripts and those computed from the surveyed preferences. The proposed methods may provide a formal way to understand and represent informal, unstructured design information using a low overhead information extraction method.

[1]  Paul E. Green,et al.  Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice , 1990 .

[2]  P. Vincke,et al.  Note-A Preference Ranking Organisation Method: The PROMETHEE Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making , 1985 .

[3]  A. Tversky,et al.  Foundations of Measurement, Vol. I: Additive and Polynomial Representations , 1991 .

[4]  Stuart Pugh,et al.  Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering , 1991 .

[5]  K. Arrow,et al.  Social Choice and Multicriterion Decision-Making , 1986 .

[6]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  SMEM Algorithm for Mixture Models , 1998, Neural Computation.

[7]  E. Rowland Theory of Games and Economic Behavior , 1946, Nature.

[8]  Kemper Lewis,et al.  A Formal Approach to Handling Conflicts in Multiattribute Group Decision Making , 2006 .

[9]  Jaap Van Brakel,et al.  Foundations of measurement , 1983 .

[10]  R. Fisher,et al.  On the Mathematical Foundations of Theoretical Statistics , 1922 .

[11]  J. Wang (International Journal of Production Research, 35(4):995-1010)A Fuzzy Outranking Method for Conceptual Design Evaluation , 1997 .

[12]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  A Comparison of Formal Methods for Evaluating the Language of Preference in Engineering Design , 2010 .

[13]  C. Dym,et al.  Rank ordering engineering designs: pairwise comparison charts and Borda counts , 2002 .

[14]  Claudia Eckert,et al.  Change Propagation Analysis in Complex Technical Systems , 2009 .

[15]  Adele Diederich,et al.  Survey of decision field theory , 2002, Math. Soc. Sci..

[16]  Erik K. Antonsson,et al.  Aggregation functions for engineering design trade-offs , 1995, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[17]  Gregory Grefenstette Automatic Thesaurus Generation from Raw Text using Knowledge-Poor Techniques , 1993 .

[18]  J. Martel,et al.  A Distance-Based Collective Preorder Integrating the Relative Importance of the Group's Members , 2004 .

[19]  Reid Hastie,et al.  The impact of information on small group choice. , 1997 .

[20]  George A. Hazelrigg,et al.  A Framework for Decision-Based Engineering Design , 1998 .

[21]  Deborah L Thurston,et al.  A formal method for subjective design evaluation with multiple attributes , 1991 .

[22]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Analysing design activity , 1996 .

[23]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  Concept Generation and Sketching: Correlations With Design Outcome , 2003 .

[24]  Y. Reich My method is better! , 2010 .

[25]  Jay B. Brockman Evaluation of student design processes , 1996, Technology-Based Re-Engineering Engineering Education Proceedings of Frontiers in Education FIE'96 26th Annual Conference.

[26]  S. Mullainathan,et al.  Do People Mean What They Say? Implications for Subjective Survey Data , 2001 .

[27]  Alice M. Agogino,et al.  TIME VARIATION OF DESIGN “STORY TELLING” IN ENGINEERING DESIGN TEAMS , 2003 .

[28]  Susan Carlson Skalak House of Quality , 2002 .

[29]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Individual Choice Behavior , 1959 .

[30]  Andy Dong,et al.  The latent semantic approach to studying design team communication , 2005 .

[31]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  A Thurstonian analysis of preference change , 2002 .

[32]  M. Tribus Rational descriptions, decisions, and designs , 1969 .

[33]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  A TEXT-BASED ANALYSIS APPROACH TO REPRESENTING THE DESIGN SELECTION PROCESS , 2007 .

[34]  E. Antonsson,et al.  Arrow's Theorem and Engineering Design Decision Making , 1999 .

[35]  P. Fishburn Choice probabilities and choice functions , 1978 .

[36]  Wei Chen,et al.  Enhancing Discrete Choice Demand Modeling for Decision-Based Design , 2003 .

[37]  T. Saaty Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory With the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2000 .

[38]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[39]  Jeff A. Bilmes,et al.  A gentle tutorial of the em algorithm and its application to parameter estimation for Gaussian mixture and hidden Markov models , 1998 .

[40]  Larry Leifer,et al.  210-NP: measuring the mechanical engineering design process , 1996, Technology-Based Re-Engineering Engineering Education Proceedings of Frontiers in Education FIE'96 26th Annual Conference.

[41]  Leigh Thompson,et al.  Making the Team: A Guide for Managers , 2003 .

[42]  Yan Jin,et al.  DETC 2006-99312 FUZZY PREFERENCE EVALUATION FOR HIERARCHICAL COEVOLUTIONARY DESIGN CONCEPT GENERATION , 2006 .

[43]  Durward K. Sobek,et al.  Linking design process to customer satisfaction through virtual design of experiments , 2006 .

[44]  M. Ben-Akiva,et al.  Discrete choice analysis , 1989 .

[45]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. , 1945 .

[46]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs , 1976 .

[47]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  A PROBABILISTIC APPROACH FOR EXTRACTING DESIGN PREFERENCES FROM DESIGN TEAM DISCUSSION , 2007 .

[48]  Andy Dong,et al.  HOW AMI DOING? THE LANGUAGE OF APPRAISAL IN DESIGN , 2006 .

[49]  Mathieu M. Geslin An argumentation-based approach to negotiation in collaborative engineering design , 2006 .

[50]  C. Kelley Solving Nonlinear Equations with Newton's Method , 1987 .

[51]  J. Shah,et al.  Collaborative Sketching (C-Sketch)--An Idea Generation Technique for Engineering Design. , 2001 .

[52]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  A study of prototypes, design activity, and design outcome , 2005 .

[53]  George A. Miller,et al.  Introduction to WordNet: An On-line Lexical Database , 1990 .

[54]  E. Antonsson,et al.  Compensation and Weights for Trade-offs in Engineering Design: Beyond the Weighted Sum , 2005 .

[55]  Bernard Mérialdo,et al.  Using category-based collaborative filtering in the Active WebMuseum , 2000, 2000 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo. ICME2000. Proceedings. Latest Advances in the Fast Changing World of Multimedia (Cat. No.00TH8532).

[56]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[57]  K. Arrow,et al.  Social Choice and Individual Values , 1951 .

[58]  Edwin T. Jaynes,et al.  Prior Probabilities , 1968, Encyclopedia of Machine Learning.

[59]  Kemper Lewis,et al.  Preference Consistency in Multiattribute Decision Making , 2005 .

[60]  E. Jaynes Information Theory and Statistical Mechanics , 1957 .

[61]  C. Manski The structure of random utility models , 1977 .

[62]  Wei Chen,et al.  An Approach to Decision-Based Design With Discrete Choice Analysis for Demand Modeling , 2003 .

[63]  W. Press,et al.  Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing , 1987 .

[64]  N. Hanley,et al.  Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation? , 2002 .

[65]  Andy Dong,et al.  Concept formation as knowledge accumulation: A computational linguistics study , 2006, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[66]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  Design information retrieval: a thesauri-based approach for reuse of informal design information , 2005, Engineering with Computers.

[67]  D. Rubin,et al.  Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM - algorithm plus discussions on the paper , 1977 .

[68]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Applied discrete-choice modelling , 1980 .

[69]  John D. Hey Do Rational People Make Mistakes , 1998 .

[70]  E. Antonsson,et al.  The Method of Imprecision Compared to Utility Theory for Design Selection Problems , 1993 .

[71]  L. A. Goodman,et al.  Social Choice and Individual Values , 1951 .

[72]  Andy Dong,et al.  HOW AM I DOING 2: COMPUTING THE LANGUAGE OF APPRAISAL IN DESIGN , 2007 .

[73]  Naonori Ueda,et al.  Deterministic annealing EM algorithm , 1998, Neural Networks.

[74]  Erik K. Antonsson,et al.  Trade-off strategies in engineering design , 1991 .

[75]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Computations with Imprecise Parameters in Engineering Design: Background and Theory , 1989 .