MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1583041253 · doi:10.1075/gs.4.22ger

Chapter 18. Seeing the graph vs. being the graph

2011· book-chapter· en· W1583041253 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Gerofsky

Bibliographic record

VenueGesture studies · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphComputer scienceCombinatoricsMathematicsTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is situated within a body of new work in mathematics education that involves studies of gesture, kinesthetic learning and embodied metaphor and mathematical understandings (for example, Lakoff & Núñez, 2000; Nemirovsky & Borba, 2003; Goldin-Meadow, Kim & Singer, 1999). This chapter reports findings from the first two years of the author’s multi-year study exploring variations of secondary students’ gestures when asked to describe mathematical graphs. Three diagnostic categories emerged from this data with regard to learners’ degree of imaginative engagement and ability to notice mathematically salient features when encountering graphs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGesture studiesSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207