MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295435233 · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00426

Build Your Own Photometer: A Guided-Inquiry Experiment To Introduce Analytical Instrumentation

2015· article· en· W2295435233 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicVarious Chemistry Research Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotometerInstrumentation (computer programming)Computer scienceInterface (matter)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A guided-inquiry project designed to teach students the basics of spectrophotometric instrumentation at the second year level is presented. Students design, build, program, and test their own single-wavelength, submersible photometer using low-cost light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and inexpensive household items. A series of structured prelaboratory assignments guide students through the processes of researching background information, designing a photometer device, and developing their own procedure to test the performance of the device. Students also learn basic skills of data acquisition by programming an easy-to-use LabVIEW interface for their device. Using a colorimetric indicator dye, students use their photometers and LabVIEW interfaces to determine the endpoint of an acid–base titration and compare the linear response of their device against that of a commercially available spectrophotometer. Students who completed the experiment indicated that the experience improved their understanding of spectroscopy, as well as their critical thinking skills and research ability.

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)0.002
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.330 · 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