MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593041558 · doi:10.18260/1-2--1217

Enhancing Engineering Outreach With Interactive Game Assessment

2020· article· en· W2593041558 on OpenAlexaff
Leilah Lyons, Zbigniew J. Pasek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutreachVisitor patternGovernment (linguistics)Game designComputer sciencePopulationMultimediaGame DeveloperVideo gameSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need to educate general public about technology grows with broadening gap between technology use and its understanding in a consumer society.One of the effective venues for such education is that of hands-on museums, which engage a wide spectrum of visitors.This paper reports on the use of a data collection mechanism embedded in an interactive museum exhibit that highlights principles of modern consumer product engineering.The exhibit is comprised of a set of computer games and complementary physical displays.The games have a built-in data collection system tracking users' actions while playing the game.Collected data allows for demographic analysis of visitor population, user performance assessment, and provides game-play perspective useful for effective game design.Presented results are based on a year-long study involving about 17,000 museum visitors. Outreach in the Form of a Museum Exhibit: Overview of the ProjectGovernment funding supports research work on the cutting edge of manufacturing technologies, but the general population's understanding of manufacturing processes, equipment, and careers lags far behind that edge.To bridge the gap, the NSF Engineering Research Center for reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems (ERC/RMS) at the University of Michigan invested in the creation of a museum exhibit to be installed at the Ann Arbor Hands-On Museum, a children's science center.Informal learning environments, like museums, align well with outreach efforts because they share many goals: to intrigue, educate, and inspire visitors.Science museums in particular have become more conscious of their role as an auxiliary to the education that occurs in traditional classrooms, striving to encourage interest in science 10 and to present science policy issues 9 that might not get addressed in the classroom.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207