MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064354267 · doi:10.1145/1878537.1878723

Programming in the model

2010· article· en· W2064354267 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCADProgramming languageInductive programmingProgramming paradigmFunctional reactive programmingParametric statisticsReactive programmingProcedural programmingSelection (genetic algorithm)Task (project management)Simple (philosophy)Code (set theory)Computer Aided DesignParametric modelVisual programming languageTheoretical computer scienceEngineering drawingArtificial intelligenceMathematicsSystems engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Programming in the model locates programming elements and tasks contiguous with computer aided design (CAD) models. It aims to reduce the separation between acts of programming, modeling and design, using both spatial coincidence to reduce task shifting and common CAD techniques to simplify the expression of code. Using techniques from visual programming, parametric modeling and CAD selection we demonstrate how programming in the model can express the core steps in a very simple simulation algorithm.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207