Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Joan Smith

Publications and source records attributed to Joan Smith.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Toward AI-Augmented Cooperative Engineering Workflows: Requirements and Architecture the European Rover Challenge

The growing availability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools creates new opportunities to support engineering design processes, yet their current use often remains limited to isolated tasks such as coding, documentation, or information retrieval. Less attention has been given to how AI can support cooperative engineering workflows at the process level, where teams must coordinate requirements, tasks, communication, knowledge transfer, and subsystem integration. This paper investigates this challenge in the context of the European Rover Challenge (ERC), where student teams design and integrate complex rover systems within a single academic cycle under strict time constraints and high subsystem interdependence. We conducted a role adaptive 40 question survey with ERC 2025 teams, yielding 104 responses from 14 teams. The survey examined team structure, knowledge transfer, task management, integration practices, communication patterns, and current AI usage. The results reveal recurring workflow bottlenecks, including limited documentation, unclear requirements, fragmented communication, informal task monitoring, and substantial integration rework. Based on these findings, we derive requirements for AI augmented cooperative engineering work-flows and propose an initial assistant system architecture that connects user facing interfaces, credential management, service selection, specialized AI services, and external engineering tools. The proposed architecture aims to support task clarification, requirement and compliance management, communication summarization, integration risk detection, and continuous knowledge capture. In doing so, the paper contributes empirical requirements and an architectural direction for AI augmented cooperative engineering workflows in hybrid human AI team settings.

cs.AI↗

Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data

We generated networks of journal relationships from citation and download data, and determined journal impact rankings from these networks using a set of social network centrality metrics. The resulting journal impact rankings were compared to the ISI IF. Results indicate that, although social network metrics and ISI IF rankings deviate moderately for citation-based journal networks, they differ considerably for journal networks derived from download data. We believe the results represent a unique aspect of general journal impact that is not captured by the ISI IF. These results furthermore raise questions regarding the validity of the ISI IF as the sole assessment of journal impact, and suggest the possibility of devising impact metrics based on usage information in general.

cs.DL↗