MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1859172557 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3742

ENHANCING DESIGN EDUCATION BY PRODUCT REVERSE ENGINEERING

2011· article· en· W1859172557 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduct designEngineering educationDesign educationCreativityKnowledge engineeringHealth systems engineeringEngineering managementProduct (mathematics)Engineering design processComputer scienceNew product developmentEngineeringKnowledge managementMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As science and technology develops faster and faster, the accumulation of knowledge is exponential over time. Engineering education must keep up with the changing environment including engineering practice. As each individual’s capability is limited, engineering students need choosing right stuff to learn so that they can graduate as qualified engineers with both broad knowledge and practical skills as required in industry. In this paper, the current engineering education is discussed with some trends, such as creativity training as most have insisted in project-based hands-on design education, broad knowledge including essential engineering science knowledge. As a comprehensive discipline, design engineering courses exist to teach engineering design fundamental. Due to immature design theory and methodology, the “learning by doing” approach is widely accepted to complement current engineering design education. In this paper, an integrated effort is introduced which combines together the two basic aspects, knowledge and skill, in order to increase the half-life of engineering knowledge and enhance the hands-on skills at the same time. Based on new development in design research, an experimental design education using Product Reverse Engineering (PRE) as education tool, is introduced with initial evaluation for suitability in design education.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.186
Teacher spread0.177 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207