MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Unbiased Mind: A Possible Resource for Medical Problems

2000· article· en· W2029388506 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Creative Behavior · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedical schoolMathematics educationDevelopmental psychologyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this pilot study was to explore the problem solving abilities of school‐aged children. The study took place at the summer day camp program at Howard Public School, in Etobicoke, Ontario. There were 15 children (6 boys, 9 girls) with a mean age at the time of testing of 5.1 years. A medical problem with a known solution (concept of a flow‐directed device to determine pulmonary wedge pressure) was presented to 15 children in the form of a children's story. The children were then asked to solve the problem by completing the story. A successful answer was taken to be any that suggested a flow‐directed device. The results showed that of the 15 children who read the story, four suggested flow‐directed methodologies. Other non‐practical, but creative, solutions were suggested. The findings suggest that by translating a previously solved medical problem into a simplistic children's story, preschoolers may provide a conceptual solution.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.337 · 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