The creative Pareto-like realization of design space based on technical constraints is described in this paper. However, it does not do an equally thorough job of describing cost allocation and constraints.

There is both mathematical and descriptive clarity in defining the rules and relationships in the directed network graphs used to display the hierarchical models for activation (concrete model), specification, and flexibility. These deterministic rules allow for subsequent processing of the design space into a Pareto diagram and choice vectors.

In my view, the next step in the process for implementing a robust flexibility/cost-tradeoff model is to treat with similar clarity the allocation costs of an activated configuration. The elements of cost allocation should include items such as part counts and costs, learning curves, and market forces. Without these elements in the model, with equally rigorous relationships, the flexibility/cost-tradeoff model described in this paper can be made weak and ineffectual.