The Use of Popular Fiction to Present a Professional Scientific Career to High School Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a previous Tips & Tools article, Patricia J. Baynham advocated for the introduction of science to students by hosting scientists in classrooms. We approached the issue from a different perspective. Since the ability of scientists to demonstrate science could be hampered with limited time and classroom resources, we proposed to introduce students to a professional and active scientific environment for a one-day outreach program. Our goal was to give students hands-on training, mentorship, career information, and an opportunity to ask questions to facilitate a possible career choice in research. Briefly, the “CSI at the LSI” outreach program (LSI, Life Sciences Institute), based on the popular fiction “Crime Scene Investigation” (CSI) TV show, was a murder mystery involving a plot with real characters (grad students, postdocs, and professors) to generate a fun and interactive learning environment. The students carried out experiments using modern scientific techniques to collect “evidence.” At the end of the day, they share the results to identify the suspect.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".