MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036060244 · doi:10.4236/ce.2012.37b039

Beneficial Experience from Teaching and Education to Research and Development

2012· article· en· W2036060244 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCreative Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResearch, Science, and Academia
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaÉcole de technologie supérieure
KeywordsExcellenceField (mathematics)PerceptionSelection (genetic algorithm)Government (linguistics)SociologyPsychologyPedagogyPolitical scienceComputer sciencePhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teaching and Education (T&E) constitute the most important activity in knowledge transfer from generation to generation. This can explain why government organizations consider the training of highly qualified personnel as one of the most important criteria in the selection of research and development (R&D) grant applications. A university professor should thus not only play the role of researcher, but also that of teacher. T&E and R&D combine to form an inseparable relationship for university professors. By shooting for excellence in T&E, we could get a new perception of a familiar field or initiate a brand new field altogether, which would in turn enhance our research. The quest for excellence in R&D leads to deeper and better understanding of materials taught, and progress in R&D enriches our T&E endeavors. Here, the author shares a beneficial experience from T&E to R&D.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.337
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.226 · 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