MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172342372 · doi:10.19030/iber.v2i4.3787

Quantum Learning: Learn Without Learning

2011· article· en· W2172342372 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Victor Selman, Ruth Corey Selman, Jerry Selman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHigher Education and Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantumLimitingPacePerceptionMathematics educationPsychologyCognitive sciencePhysicsQuantum mechanicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum Education is the natural way to learn---motivating and exciting people to take responsibility for their own education.. The Montessori Model represents the closest example of Quantum Education, where the environment is prepared with didactic materials for the children to absorb at their own pace. Where children learn without formal pedagogical machinations, without consciously learning how to learn---by doing. Like Quantum Logic or Quantum Physics or Quantum Games, quantum thinking is an insightful, body/mind approach, attempting to connect our classical worldwhere objects or things have definite identitieswith our new quantum worldwhere things take on multiple realities simultaneously. The concept of mind, limiting our perceptual abilities is no longer confined to the brain or even the body---all organs are, in some ways, thinking organs, permitting restructuring of our cognitive educational commitment toward infinite choice and possibility. Quantum Education has been defined by the Canadian Quantum 2000 Group as the need for a quantum shift in what students are expected to learn in Alberta public schools starting Y2000.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.018
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.005

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER)Same topicHigher Education and Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207