Teaching Standard Deviation by Building from Student Invention
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
First-year physics laboratories are often driven by a mix of goals that includes the illustration or discovery of basic physics principles and a myriad of technical skills involving specific equipment, data analysis, and report writing. The sheer number of such goals seems guaranteed to produce cognitive overload, even when highly detailed “cookbook” instructions are given. Recent studies indicate that this approach leaves students with a poor conceptual understanding of one of the most important features of laboratory physics and of the real world of science, in general: the development of an understanding of the nature of measurement and its attendant uncertainty1. While students might be able to reproduce certain technical manipulations of data, as novice thinkers they lack the mental scaffolding that allows an expert to organize and apply this knowledge.2,3 Our goal is to put novices on the path to expertise, so that they will be able to transfer their knowledge to novel situations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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