Organizing Information for the Canadian Design Engineering Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The author reports on a universal searchable index of Web resources for design engineering. The project is part of the Web site for the Canadian Design Engineering Network (CDEN), a recently funded national initiative to provide a mechanism for design engineering practitioners, educators, and others to access recent information on the field, to collaborate, and to help student learn design engineering. The searchable index, the CDEN Online Resource Catalog (CORC) is a simple set of CGI scripts working in conjunction with an existing Web indexing robot (Swish-E), and with a human “reviewer”, to bring online quickly a large portion of the available Web resources on design engineering. Besides its use to provide access to relevant resources, the author intends to use CORC to discover the organizational structure of design engineering information – such a structure could be valuable to both design practitioners and researchers. Proc. WebNet2000 Conference, AACE, San Antonio.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.028 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.415 | 0.232 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".