MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119363668 · doi:10.1109/enabl.1996.555046

EEN: a pen-based electronic notebook for unintrusive acquisition of engineering design knowledge

2002· article· en· W2119363668 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInformation engineeringFocus (optics)Engineering design processSoftware engineeringSystems engineeringInformation systemEngineering managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capturing design information and decisions is critical to supporting the re-use of designs and coordination in engineering teams. Most of this information is currently not recorded at all. In this paper, we focus on the role of electronic engineering notebooks in the capture, storage and dissemination of design information and decisions, and on their role in integrating and managing design decisions and processes. We propose EEN (Electronic Engineering Notebook) as a tool for assisting engineers in information-related tasks, and ultimately leading to the replacement of traditional paper engineering notebooks. This paper presents the requirements, design and implementation of EEN, as well as initial experimental results.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUsability and User Interface DesignFrench-language works237,207