MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096208965

Emerging technologies in a tele-collaborative design studio between the Pennsylvania State University and Carleton University

2008· article· en· W2096208965 on OpenAlex
Katsuhiko Muramoto, Michael Jemtrud, Sonali Kumar, Bimal Balakrishnan, Danielle Wiley

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

VenueJournal of Information Technology in Construction · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudioMultimediaComputer scienceTelecommunications
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research project investigates the use of a network-enabled platform (NEP) involving a combination of technologies that include: high bandwidth network infrastructure; high-performance visualization and computer cluster solutions; standard and high definition tele-presence/communication infrastructure; co-located immersive environments; and a range of modeling and imaging applications. The NEP enabled student teams in multiple locations to collaborate via on-demand, synchronous access to project data, visualization, modeling, simulation and multimodal interpersonal communication tools through a web service based dashboard interface that hid the logistic and technical complexities to the user. As a preliminary report on a proof-of-concept design studio conducted during the spring semester of 2007 between the Carleton Immersive Media Studio (CIMS) at Carleton University in Ottawa and the Immersive Environment Laboratory (IEL) at Pennsylvania State University, the paper first describes the implementation of this network-centric collaborative design platform. The report articulates the “staging” of the conditions of possibility for a dynamic interplay between technological mediation and the reality of making, then compares the use of high bandwidth technology with customized symmetrical toolsets in the tele-collaborative educational environment, versus commercial toolsets deployed over moderate bandwidth connections. In each setting, the collaborative environment is assessed according to issues encountered by students and design outcomes. The effectiveness of the digitally mediated collaborative studio is also gauged in terms of student reaction to the learning process via feedback surveys and questionnaires.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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