IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i19p14538-d1254666.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Study of Sustainable Product Design Evaluation Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Deep Residual Networks

Author

Listed:
  • Huan Lin

    (Key Laboratory of Air-driven Equipment Technology of Zhejiang Province, Quzhou University, Quzhou 324000, China)

  • Xiaolei Deng

    (Key Laboratory of Air-driven Equipment Technology of Zhejiang Province, Quzhou University, Quzhou 324000, China)

  • Jianping Yu

    (Key Laboratory of Air-driven Equipment Technology of Zhejiang Province, Quzhou University, Quzhou 324000, China)

  • Xiaoliang Jiang

    (Key Laboratory of Air-driven Equipment Technology of Zhejiang Province, Quzhou University, Quzhou 324000, China)

  • Dongsong Zhang

    (Key Laboratory of Air-driven Equipment Technology of Zhejiang Province, Quzhou University, Quzhou 324000, China)

Abstract

Traditional product design evaluation processes are resource-intensive and time-consuming, resulting in unsustainably higher costs and longer lead times. Therefore, sustainable product design evaluation has become an increasingly crucial aspect of product design, focusing on creating a high-efficiency, high-reliability, and low-carbon-emission approach. In this study, we proposed an integrated approach that combines manual design evaluation based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) with an automatic design evaluation based on a ResNet-50 network in order to develop a sustainable design evaluation method. First, the evaluation level and indicators for the shape design of a tail-light were defined using the AHP. We followed this by establishing a determination matrix and weight coefficients for the design indicators to create a manual design evaluation model. Second, tail-light shape image datasets were manually annotated based on the evaluation indicators, and design datasets were constructed. The ResNet-50 algorithm was introduced to train the datasets, and the automatic evaluation model for product design was constructed through training and tuning. Finally, we validated the feasibility and effectiveness of the product design evaluation method, which was based on AHP and ResNet-50, by comparing the results obtained using both manual design and automatic design evaluations. The results showed that the proposed sustainable product design evaluation model provides an efficient and reliable method for evaluating product design, improves the decision-making process, and empowers the design and development process. The model enhances resource efficiency and economic sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Huan Lin & Xiaolei Deng & Jianping Yu & Xiaoliang Jiang & Dongsong Zhang, 2023. "A Study of Sustainable Product Design Evaluation Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Deep Residual Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-22, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:19:p:14538-:d:1254666
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/19/14538/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/19/14538/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    2. Jinxuan Zhou & Shucheng Tan & Jun Li & Jian Xu & Chao Wang & Hui Ye, 2023. "Landslide Susceptibility Assessment Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): A Case Study of a Construction Site for Photovoltaic Power Generation in Yunxian County, Southwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Yixue Lin & Wanda Chi & Wenxue Sun & Shicai Liu & Di Fan, 2020. "Human Action Recognition Algorithm Based on Improved ResNet and Skeletal Keypoints in Single Image," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-12, June.
    4. Kadir Sabanci, 2023. "Benchmarking of CNN Models and MobileNet-BiLSTM Approach to Classification of Tomato Seed Cultivars," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Hai-Min Lyu & Jack Shuilong Shen & Arul Arulrajah, 2018. "Assessment of Geohazards and Preventative Countermeasures Using AHP Incorporated with GIS in Lanzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Seunghwan Myeong & Yuseok Jung & Eunuk Lee, 2018. "A Study on Determinant Factors in Smart City Development: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Tatbita Titin Suhariyanto & Dzuraidah Abd Wahab & Mohd Nizam Ab Rahman, 2018. "Product Design Evaluation Using Life Cycle Assessment and Design for Assembly: A Case Study of a Water Leakage Alarm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-26, August.
    8. Ness, Barry & Urbel-Piirsalu, Evelin & Anderberg, Stefan & Olsson, Lennart, 2007. "Categorising tools for sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 498-508, January.
    9. Irina Canco & Drita Kruja & Tiberiu Iancu, 2021. "AHP, a Reliable Method for Quality Decision Making: A Case Study in Business," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-14, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alfonso Maria Ponsiglione & Francesco Amato & Santolo Cozzolino & Giuseppe Russo & Maria Romano & Giovanni Improta, 2022. "A Hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process and Likert Scale Approach for the Quality Assessment of Medical Education Programs," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, April.
    2. José A. Gómez-Limón & Manuel Arriaza & M. Dolores Guerrero-Baena, 2020. "Building a Composite Indicator to Measure Environmental Sustainability Using Alternative Weighting Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Rubio Rodríguez, M.A. & Ruyck, J. De & Díaz, P. Roque & Verma, V.K. & Bram, S., 2011. "An LCA based indicator for evaluation of alternative energy routes," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(3), pages 630-635, March.
    4. Xi-Cun He & Tian-Liang Yang & Shui-Long Shen & Ye-Shuang Xu & Arul Arulrajah, 2019. "Land Subsidence Control Zone and Policy for the Environmental Protection of Shanghai," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-13, July.
    5. Fang, Lei, 2022. "Measuring and decomposing group performance under centralized management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 1006-1013.
    6. Muhammad Atiq Ur Rehman Tariq & Cheuk Yin Wai & Nitin Muttil, 2020. "Vulnerability Assessment of Ubiquitous Cities Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, December.
    7. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    9. Sueun Jung & Jihyun Lee, 2023. "Exploring a Conceptual Framework of Koreans’ Residential Satisfaction Based on Maslow’s Human Needs: A Qualitative and Quantitative Integrated Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-40, September.
    10. Figge, Frank & Hahn, Tobias & Barkemeyer, Ralf, 2014. "The If, How and Where of assessing sustainable resource use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 274-283.
    11. L. Hay & A. H. B. Duffy & R. I. Whitfield, 2017. "The S‐Cycle Performance Matrix: Supporting Comprehensive Sustainability Performance Evaluation of Technical Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 45-70, January.
    12. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    13. Hai-Min Lyu & Ye-Shuang Xu & Wen-Chieh Cheng & Arul Arulrajah, 2018. "Flooding Hazards across Southern China and Prospective Sustainability Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    14. Yuan-Wei Du & Wen Zhou, 2019. "DSmT-Based Group DEMATEL Method with Reaching Consensus," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(6), pages 1201-1230, December.
    15. Jean-Marc Douguet & Pierre Failler & Gianluca Ferraro, 2022. "Sustainability Assessment of the Societal Costs of Fishing Activities in a Deliberative Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-21, May.
    16. Diana Tuomasjukka & Staffan Berg & Marcus Lindner, 2013. "Managing Sustainability of Fennoscandian Forests and Their Use by Law and/or Agreement: For Whom and Which Purpose?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-32, December.
    17. Georgiadou, Maria Christina & Hacking, Theophilus & Guthrie, Peter, 2012. "A conceptual framework for future-proofing the energy performance of buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 145-155.
    18. Carmen Herrero & Antonio Villar, 2022. "Sports competitions and the Break-Even rule," Working Papers 22.13, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    19. Mostafa Shaaban & Jürgen Scheffran & Jürgen Böhner & Mohamed S. Elsobki, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies in Egypt Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    20. Ngoc-Ninh Ho & Truong Lam Do & Dinh-Thao Tran & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2022. "Indigenous pig production and welfare of ultra-poor ethnic minority households in the Northern mountains of Vietnam," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 156-179, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:19:p:14538-:d:1254666. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.