MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592842757 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.6480

A GRADUATE COURSE IN FIRE PROTECTIVE DESIGN AND BUILDING CODES AN INDUSTRY AND UNIVERSITY COLLABORATION

2017· article· en· W2592842757 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
M. J. Frye, P. Zurkan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire effects on concrete materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsEngineeringAuditCourse (navigation)Engineering educationMedical educationEngineering managementEngineering ethicsMedicineBusinessAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the fall of 2013, the Faculty of Engineering has offered a graduate course in Fire Protective Design and Building Codes based on Part 3 of the National Building Code of Canada. The course is made available to graduate students in architecture and to all branches of engineering. It is also offered to off campus practicing architects and engineers who wish to either take the course for credit or who would like to audit the course.Introduction of this course into the graduate studies program at the University of Manitoba was the direct result of collaboration between the university Centre for Engineering Professional Practice and Engineering Education and industry. Industry financial support for the course instructors was provided by the Winnipeg Construction Association and the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Manitoba. (Engineers Geoscientists Manitoba).This paper provides an overview of the course objectives, the course content and the expected and realized outcomes. The course proved to be very popular, with course registration averaging between fourteen and eighteen graduate students each year. It was highly rated by the year end student course evaluations. It was particularly popular with international graduate students, many who came from countries where exposure to fire protective design and building codes was limited or non-existent. As a spin off from the course, in 2015, the Winnipeg Construction Association began offering a workshop/seminar series of five half day courses. These workshop/seminars have been oversubscribed and are attended by a very diverse group of construction practitioners that includes architects, engineers, building officials and contractors.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicFire effects on concrete materialsFrench-language works237,207