MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278726136 · doi:10.5194/hessd-12-11591-2015

Studienlandschaft Schwingbachtal: an out-door full-scale learning tool newly equipped with augmented reality

2015· article· en· W2278726136 on OpenAlexaff
Alice H. Aubert, O. Schnepel, Philipp Kraft, Tobias Houska, Ina Plesca, Natalie Orlowski, Lutz Breuer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeography Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented realityField (mathematics)Scale (ratio)Computer scienceInstrumentation (computer programming)Human–computer interactionVirtual realityMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This paper addresses education and communication in hydrology and geosciences. Many approaches can be used, such as the well-known seminars, modelling exercises and practical field work but out-door learning in our discipline is a must, and this paper focuses on the recent development of a new out-door learning tool at the landscape scale. To facilitate improved teaching and hands-on experience, we designed the Studienlandschaft Schwingbachtal. Equipped with field instrumentation, education trails, and geocache, we now implemented an augmented reality App, adding virtual teaching objects on the real landscape. The App development is detailed, to serve as methodology for people wishing to implement such a tool. The resulting application, namely the Schwingbachtal App, is described as an example. We conclude that such an App is useful for communication and education purposes, making learning pleasant, and offering personalized options.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.013

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeography Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207