MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139191167 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3779

DESIGN ENGINEERING - NOT JUST APPLIED SCIENCE

2011· article· en· W2139191167 on OpenAlex
W. Ernst Eder

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Action (physics)Engineering design processScience and engineeringDesign scienceComputer scienceHuman engineeringManagement scienceEngineering ethicsEngineering managementEngineeringSystems engineeringKnowledge managementMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Engineering has different aims to science. Science collects bodies of knowledge. Engineering provides processes and technical systems for specific tasks. A main region of engineering is designing, with technical, economic, human, sociological and psychological dimensions. The scope of information for design engineering is broad – not just engineering sciences. Types of products are needed to (a) compare design processes, and (b) to guide design education. Three action modes exist: (1) normal operation, (2) risk operation, and (3) safety or rational operation. (2) and (3) need guidelines and experience of systematic and methodical approaches, which must be learned before attempting to use them. A further problem of examinability arises.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.869

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.184 · 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