Dear Fellow Researchers,
Coming from the mathematical field, we currently are doing a broad benchmark focused on the different technics/methods/framework used to ensure repeatability and comparability for different mechanical-engineering processes and tasks (design, manufacturing, quality check, etc.).
We do believe in "repeatability/comparability as a requirement" to be able to periodically perform a State Of The Art Benchmark/Review.
I will be very glad and grateful if you could send me any research initiative / project / publication / etc. around this idea.
We are facing this problematic in my domain (reverse engineering) and we hardly can nowadays compare or evaluate the different techniques to perform specific tasks.
It would be very valuable to be able to define "best practices" in order to promote the idea : "repeatability/comparability as a requirement".
Of course, it can't be broad and general, it needs to be focused and oriented to specific tasks/problems/challenges/processes, etc.
What do you think about such an idea ?
What limits do you see in such an objective ?
Any requirement to ensure the appropriateness of the method/evaluation process/framework ?
You can reply to my direct email address if needed : [log in to unmask]
Thank you in advance for your valuable help,
Best Regards,
--
Jonathan DEKHTIAR - http://www.jonathandekhtiar.eu // @born2data
Poste 4971 – Fixe (+33)3 44 23 49 71 - CNRS - Laboratoire ROBERVAL - Bureau I101 – Elu au Conseil de L’Ecole Doctorale
PhD Student in Mechanical Reverse Engineering, M.-Ing. in Computer Science specialized in Data Mining at the University of Technology of Compiegne.
-----Message d'origine-----
De : PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] De la part de Stuart Reeves
Envoyé : mardi 31 mai 2016 11:24
À : [log in to unmask]
Objet : Re: Why Do So Many Studies Fail to Replicate?
> On 31 May 2016, at 09:56, Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> It seems to me that contextual sensitivity would be an important factor in design research *if* we were to spend more time attempting to study and replicate published results. While this would not be significant for projects in design history or critical design, it would be important for interaction design, industrial design, and many other fields where what we study involves human beings — and how they perceive, use, understand, or interact with designed artifacts of many kinds.
HCI has had an ongoing discussion on this topic for a while.
This is my summary of a workshop at CHI on replication in HCI from a few years back: [log in to unmask]" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]
There's a lot more on the topic if you search around.
--
Stuart Reeves
Mixed Reality Lab
School of Computer Science (C15), University of Nottingham [log in to unmask] http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~str
Latest papers:
- The future as a design problem (email me for PDF)
- Embeddedness and sequentiality in social media (http://bit.ly/1WlQiaN)
- HCI as science (http://bit.ly/1LHG9OB)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|