MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418050571 · doi:10.18260/1-2--1909

An Algorithm For Project Assignment In Capstone Design

2020· article· en· W2418050571 on OpenAlex
Theodor Freiheit, Julian Wood

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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapstoneProject-based learningComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Project managementSet (abstract data type)Engineering managementTeamworkWork breakdown structureProject management triangleProject charterAlgorithmEngineeringMathematics educationSystems engineeringPsychologyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an algorithm to automate the assignment of students to project teams. Students bid on a limited set of choices of the projects being offered. The algorithm then attempts to place students into projects such that the overall project assignment solution provides the highest 'satisfaction'. Satisfaction is defined by a scoring methodology for assigning students to their preferred project. The algorithm allows pre-assignment of students to a particular project, closes projects after they have been sufficiently subscribed, provides a bumping routine to move students around in finding a best solution, and eliminates 'unpopular' projects. It has successfully been tested in assigning students to project teams, reducing the time required to one quarter that taken using a similar manual system.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.324
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

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207