MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1876341021 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.4688

Do Engineering – Anywhere, Anytime

2012· article· en· W1876341021 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark Walters, Erik Luther, Julia Dinolfo

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)ScalabilityInstrumentation (computer programming)Computer scienceEngineering managementSpace (punctuation)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need to create excitement about engineering has never been more critical. Our global community is faced with finding solutions to big challenges such as global warming, the energy crisis, and increasing demands on communications and urban infrastructure. To address these grand challenges, we require future engineers who are capable, innovative and equipped with practical skills in order to navigate from the design constraints to the solution. To encourage development of this practical skill, educators need to find ways to enable students to “do engineering,” anywhere, anytime. The three fundamental restrictions that prevent educators from being able to accomplish this are cost, accessibility to equipment – both in and out of the laboratory – and space and facilities. This paper discusses different ways in which educators are helping students connect with the world around them using graphical system design hardware and software technologies that are both affordable and scalable. We discuss flexible, compact, instrumentation platforms and illustrate how universities use this to enhance labs and improve practical experiences. We demonstrate how educators leverage low-cost, student-owned instrumentation hardware to teach concepts in students’ preferred environments, whether that is in the lab, library, or dorm room.

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)0.005
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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1420.065

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207