MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137341891 · doi:10.1109/aps.2006.1710772

Introducing student projects in introductory electromagnetics: what have we learned?

2006· article· en· W2137341891 on OpenAlex
Marija Popović, Dennis D. Giannacopoulos

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Compatibility and Noise Suppression
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersRoyal Bank of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsCurriculumComputer scienceClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationElectromagneticsOrder (exchange)Work (physics)Engineering ethicsEngineering managementPedagogyEngineering physicsEngineeringMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a trial introduction of student projects as a mandatory part of the fundamental EM course. In particular, in order to comply with the curriculum at McGill University, the paper is limited to topics on electrostatics, magnetostatics and the slowly time-varying fields. Nonetheless, even these limitations left sufficient room to find applications upon which students could base their projects and present them in class to their peers. In order to avoid jeopardizing the learning of EM fundamentals and the rigors of the associated mathematical formulations, the project carried only 10% of the overall course grade. Nonetheless, the students approached it enthusiastically and their feedback suggests that the student projects may be a tool of choice for improving the dynamics of undergraduate EM teaching.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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