MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Importance of Programming Paradigms to Manufacturing Engineering Graduates: A Case Study from International Islamic University Malaysia Graduates

2013· article· en· W2020324915 on OpenAlex
Muhammad Ashraf Fauzi, Daeng Ahmad Zuhri Zuhud, Hafiz Husin

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mechanics and Materials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsScale (ratio)IslamEngineering managementProcess (computing)EngineeringManufacturingHigher educationManufacturing processManufacturing engineeringComputer scienceBusinessMarketingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital computers that automate manufacturing process are an important aspect for any manufacturing engineers in the modern world. Selection of the programming paradigm (PP), as well as the programming language (PL) that supports it, is crucial to ensure the correct ideas are being used to automate the solution of the problem. In current Malaysian Higher institution practices, various PPs and PLs courses are offered to current undergraduate manufacturing majors. An online survey was deployed to experienced manufacturing engineers from various manufacturing specializations in the industry. Graduates from one of Malaysias public universities, International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) have been chosen for this particular study. From the survey, it has been found that almost 80% of the participants agreed that PPs are important for manufacturing graduates. It was found out that 90% of the participants were from intermediate (scale of 3) until poor (scale of 1) to express their ability to explain PPs if asked. Only about 10% are able to explain on PPs (scale of 4 and 5). The study concluded that majority of the manufacturing graduates from IIUM agreed that PP is an important subject to be taught in university. However, it was found the majority of the manufacturing graduates lack the knowledge and understanding of PPs and general PLs.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · 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