MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115939711

EFFECTIVE LEARNING OF BUCKLING OF COLUMNS IN ENGINEERING PROGRAMS

2010· article· en· W2115939711 on OpenAlexaffabout
Van Ngan Lê, Henri Champliaud, Françoise Marchand, Patrick Terriault, Jean Arteau

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingStaticsStructural engineeringEngineering economicsDifferential (mechanical device)Work (physics)Applied mechanicsEngineeringComputer scienceMathematics educationMathematicsMechanical engineeringEconomicsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In classic mechanical and civil engineering programs, buckling of columns is learned at end of the basic strength of materials course due to prerequisite subjects on integrals, differential equations, and engineering statics. This classic chronology of subject “buckling of columns” presents only a small advantage, which is to understand mathematical demonstration of buckling formulas, but does not give students opportunity of designing structures during learning engineering statics and strength of materials. By reorganizing few subjects and introducing practical aspects of buckling formulas earlier without all prerequisite subjects, students could practice structural design projects and some simultaneous engineering aspects by team work as early as from midway of the very first engineering course. This new approach has been applied for many years to Mechanical Engineering program of École de technologie supérieure in Montréal, Canada and proven very effective and well appreciated by students.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)Same topicEngineering Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207