Making a Connection between Computational Modeling and Educational Research
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
Bruner, Goodnow, and Austin's (1956) research on concept development is re-examined from a connectionist perspective. A neural network was constructed which associates positive and negative instances of a concept with their corresponding attribute values. Two methods were used to help preserve the ecological validity of the input: 1) closely mapping the input to the actual visual stimuli; and 2) structuring the output layer based on Gagne's (1962, 1985) work on human concept learning. This resulted in the addition of output units referred to as attribute context constraints. These units required the network to demonstrate the identification of attributes both relevant and irrelevant to the task of classification. Results suggest that the simultaneous learning of attributes guided the network in constructing a faster and more generalizable representation than when attribute constraints were absent. Results are discussed with respect to the advantages of computational approaches to studying learning.
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 | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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