MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1914525887 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.5757

DEVELOPING A MODEL FOR INNOVATION IN UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING EDUCATION – THE SYSTEMATIC INTEGRATION OF HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGN

2015· article· en· W1914525887 on OpenAlex
Patrick Neumann, Judy Village, Filippo A. Salustri

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSix SigmaEngineering managementComputer scienceEngineeringEngineering ethicsManufacturing engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this project was to integratemore human factors and human centered design contentinto mechanical engineering courses. Using the Six Sigma(DMAIC) approach, we defined HF broadly as anycourse content aspects related to humans. We measuredthe HF content of courses based on interviews with 38instructors. All but six courses had less than 10 hours ofHF content and only one course taught students how touse HF aspects to improve design. Twelve courses weretargeted for improvement and of these, seven instructorsagreed to integrate HF content. The observed rate ofchange is modest and ongoing support would be neededto foster more substantial development. We recommend amore nuanced 4-level model for defining HF-relatedcoursework. We also discuss the barriers to integratingHF and suggest some countermeasures

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.216 · 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