MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338398647 · doi:10.5539/ass.v12n5p195

Student Innovation Process from Self-architecting Point of View

2016· article· en· W2338398647 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityImmortalityVanguardEternityIngenuityIncentiveValue (mathematics)Process (computing)Flexibility (engineering)ManagementSociologyAestheticsEpistemologyComputer sciencePhilosophyEconomicsPolitical scienceLawHistoryTheologyMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Love to bubble the innovative creativity within oneself and increase the capacity of creativity capacity in human nature show the most striking difference between him and the other creations and will never be the end for this aim because man has always been following the attainment of immortality and is ahead of its era. The innovative creativity capacity of the mind is the most powerful incentives to form the processes that human could have been successful to represent it till today because human did a lot of searches and endeavors to access the eternity and being vanguard against the time over the time so as to find the solution to this cycle but he couldn’t be successful in this field.</p><p>Lack of access to the innovative internal sources is because the man should at the first step be aware of philosophy, ignorance and life and critic them without the slightest consideration so that by attending self architect be aware of the value and the ability of the mind and by depending on own ingenuity move toward the creation of the new theoretical to outshine the time and lead up to the millennium of those won be and the powerful presence and immortality would be realized that it’s output would be entering into the ultramodern mind cycle. The innovation means creating and providing new vents of the theoretical with the content of vanguard against the time.<strong> </strong>The process of entering to this cycle is so that the student must have believed his ignorance to be able to pass through his mental illness and feels the thirst of knowledge. Now he finds that having the eyes for viewing the wisdom and finding the ingenuity should pass via for main cycle to attend the knowledge and innovation through the sight of his architect (creator). Failure to pass the mentioned process expresses the shuck document with empty reason ownership. Realizing the process of forming own diagram and innovative design in this article has been delivered to the reader as discover page.</p>

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.405 · 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