MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061085110 · doi:10.1504/ijamc.2008.018505

Developing a simple repository to support authoring Learning Objects

2008· article· en· W2061085110 on OpenAlex
Zhenyu Cheryl Qian, Yingjie Chen, Robert Woodbury

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

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Media and Communication · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAgile software developmentProcess (computing)Object (grammar)World Wide WebSimple (philosophy)Space (punctuation)Learning objectMultimediaKnowledge managementSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports our experience of designing a human centric repository to support Learning Object (LO) authoring. The users of DesignPatterns.ca are designers who want to explore, communicate and share parametric modelling knowledge and strategies. Aiming to support such a community, we provided succinct functions to meet their evident needs, kept the effort of packaging and publishing to a minimum, and left space for user innovation. We used agile methods and negotiated process and design with users regularly. The paper records and critically reviews the process we followed and lessons we learned in this repository development.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.291 · 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