Collaborative Approach for Teaching Chemical Process Design
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A collaborative approach has been successfully used to teach the senior process design course in the Chemical Engineering program at UNB since 2010. Every design project in the course is sponsored by an outside client. Two teams of four or five students are assigned to each project. The teams work independently and are co-mentored by a faculty member and a practicing engineer. This collaborative approach brings engineering practice in the classroom while keeping faculty members in control of academic requirements. Eight evenly-spaced milestones pace students and co-mentors by defining the tasks that need to be accomplished, by setting the marking scheme for the deliverables and by providing a framework for the progressive assembly of a high-quality final report. Our approach has increased the number of faculty members interested in design activities and allows students to contribute to the local economy while becoming proficient in engineering design. Comments received from students, clients and co-mentors have been highly positive.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it