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

DESIGN ENGINEERING - NOT JUST APPLIED SCIENCE

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

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.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.015
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.008

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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207