Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes a two term design projects course in the Mechanical Eng. Dept. at the U of S. It is considered to be a “flagship” course for students in the final year of their program. Students focus on solving design problems submitted by industries and other outside organizations. Each student group works on a separate and unique project. The course provides students with an excellent opportunity to apply their engineering analysis and design theory. They function as a team, typical of practicing consulting engineers. They are responsible for the direction and quality of the work performed. Faculty act as technical advisors to the students, not as supervisors. The student groups search the literature, brainstorm design alternatives and analyze and test promising alternatives. A final report and seminar presentation are required for every group as well as periodic progress reports and presentations. Students get to work on a “real world” problem, typical of exactly what they might experience after graduation. This is really an extremely important and crucial distinguishing feature of the course and serves as a strong motivator for the students. The course therefore acts as a bridge between a student’s academic training and their practice of engineering. For industry, it is an opportunity to investigate the feasibility of a new design, process or method of production for minimal cost.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".