{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01583710407239819, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.4106280193236715, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The process for individuating TRIZ Inventive Principles: deterministic, stochastic or domain-oriented?

Abstract Although TRIZ is widely acknowledged as a powerful aid to improve efficacy and efficiency of the creative design process, practitioners diffusedly experience difficulties in the selection of the most suitable tool. Such an issue represents a severe limitation in consideration of the large number of tools TRIZ offers. Here, Inventive Principles (IPs) are acknowledged as the most popular TRIZ technique, and their conjointly use with the Contradiction Matrix makes the selection of the appropriate IP a sufficiently supported task. However, the reliability of the Contradiction Matrix is often questioned and an agreement on a solid and reliable procedure for the selection of IPs is far from being reached. In such a context, the paper investigates the recurrence of IPs to solve contradictions, with reference to a classification framework that takes into consideration the nature of the problem to be solved and the technical-scientific domain it belongs to. The outcomes of the analysis reveal that leveraged IPs are considerably related with the technical-scientific domain and the nature of the problem to be solved. The found relationships are worth delving into and translating into selection guidelines.