MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996815387 · doi:10.1119/1.2120387

Resistance Is Not Futile: Air Resistance in an Algebra-Based Course

2005· article· en· W1996815387 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Physics Teacher · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourse (navigation)Object (grammar)Fraction (chemistry)KinematicsAccelerationTerminal velocityScope (computer science)ProjectileTerminal (telecommunication)Simple (philosophy)MathematicsAlgebra over a fieldCalculus (dental)Computer sciencePhysicsClassical mechanicsEngineeringMechanicsPure mathematicsProgramming languageAerospace engineeringQuantum mechanicsArtificial intelligenceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we show that an object's terminal speed due to air resistance depends not on any of the object's details, but only on the distance at which an object reaches a particular fraction of its terminal speed. We show this graphically and algebraically. Although a mathematical treatment of air resistance is beyond the scope of an algebra-based, introductory physics course, some of the concepts involved are important for (at least) three reasons. First, the equations used for uniform acceleration only approximately (and perhaps badly!) describe projectiles students know (a home-run baseball, for example). With the equation for terminal speed, students can estimate the speeds at which the simple kinematic equations no longer produce “reasonable” approximations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.264 · 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