MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1894934990 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.4692

PRODUCT LIFECYCLE EXPERIENCE FOR PRE-UNIVERSITY STUDENTS THROUGH A HOVERCRAFT COMPETITION

2012· article· en· W1894934990 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResearch, Science, and Academia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaBoeing (Canada)Red River CollegeInnovative Medicines Canada
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsCompetition (biology)Product (mathematics)Plan (archaeology)Work (physics)Test (biology)Process (computing)EngineeringNew product developmentBusinessEngineering managementMarketingManagementComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Discovery Program is an annual competition where teams of high school students compete to design, build, and test a remote control hovercraft. The competition exposes students to the manufacturing process, from research and development, through to the product launch. Preuniversity teams from across Manitoba compete to build the hovercraft, write a business plan, and present their work to a panel of judges from academia and industry. The winning teams receive scholarships for postsecondary studies.This paper describes the Discovery Program hovercraft competition and lessons learned from the first four years of the program.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.316 · 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