MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2728884079 · doi:10.1152/advan.00036.2017

Effort and trust: the underpinnings of active learning

2017· editorial· en· W2728884079 on OpenAlexafffund
Seana Adams, Krish Bilimoria, Neha Malhotra, P. K. Rangachari

Bibliographic record

VenueAJP Advances in Physiology Education · 2017
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
FundersDivision of Undergraduate EducationMcMaster University
KeywordsActive learning (machine learning)Mathematics educationPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three undergraduate students and their teacher discuss two crucial issues that form the implicit basis of active learning: effort and trust. They use a single course in a Health Sciences Program to anchor their comments.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0280.055
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.416 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAJP Advances in Physiology EducationSame topicInnovative Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207