Compare variants and scenarios

Use Engineering study to keep named alternatives, source data and historical calculations together. Duplicate a baseline, revise one declared choice, run the variant and compare its decision against the baseline.

Saving a workspace retains the study. Device-local recovery helps recover drafts; export remains the portable copy. Historical evidence stays attached after revision and is marked by its input bindings.

Sensitivity and conductor comparisons

Sensitivity sweeps vary declared operating inputs and show how the screening result responds. Dataset comparisons evaluate conductor/product alternatives under the study’s stated assumptions. Keep changed material domains and price sources visible when comparing costs.

Repricing a completed result answers an economic what-if. It does not automatically provide a new refined engineering recommendation. Graded or piece-priced studies require their corresponding per-spec declarations.

Explicit scenario studies

Current source and the hosted workbench provide What-if robustness study. Select comparable alternatives, retain the nominal row, and declare supplier-price multipliers, critical-current multipliers and temperature offsets. Preview the workload, then run.

Each row runs the bounded search at its original numerical fidelity. Unsupported material queries remain unresolved. Scaled critical-current data receives a synthetic sensitivity identity; it retains the source attribution without inheriting a measured-data claim.

Read scenario winners, changes of preferred alternative, acceptance checks and unresolved rows together. An unresolved alternative prevents a supported global ranking. Cost ranges and regret describe the choices and scenarios actually evaluated.

The scenario set assigns no probabilities. Editable defaults are illustrative what-ifs, and a stable winner across those rows is conditional on those assumptions.

CLI/MCP specifications and limits: scenario reference. Workspace format and history: engineering workspaces.