MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1818136897 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.4662

CASE STUDIES – A TOOL FOR LEARNING

2012· article· en· W1818136897 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jim Graham, David Kurz

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationTeamworkSubject (documents)Engineering managementUndergraduate educationEngineeringEngineering educationComputer scienceEngineering ethicsMedical educationManagementWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board requires broadly-based undergraduate programs that develop technical awareness, motivation, confidence, teamwork and life-long learning. These objectives can be reached in both undergraduate and postgraduate courses using projects based on case studies. The projects use published data and records of performance that students can reproduce using modern design tools and numerical analysis. The paper includes examples of projects in the subject area of geotechnical engineering. Case studies are becoming increasingly valuable as employers and licensing authorities move toward a combination of broadly-based undergraduate education and more specialized postgraduate or in-practice training.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0140.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0130.016
Open science0.0070.011
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207