MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729889382 · doi:10.18260/1-2--11886

Using Computer Simulation To Teach Technical Aspects Of Construction In A Liberal Arts Setting

2020· article· en· W2729889382 on OpenAlexaff
Ashraf Ghaly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiberal arts educationCurriculumSession (web analytics)Reading (process)Mathematics educationThe artsVocational educationEngineering educationLiberal educationComputer scienceEngineering ethicsEngineeringEngineering managementPedagogySociologyHigher educationPsychologyPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The general education curriculum at Liberal Arts colleges requires students to take courses in history, literature, civilization, social sciences, sciences, and cultural diversity.These courses comprise almost a third of the entire curriculum.All students, including engineering students, are required to take these courses to fulfill the general education component of their curriculum.In this day and age where technology plays an integral role in people's daily lives, it seems odd that, although engineering students are required to take almost a third of their courses on nonengineering topics, the liberal arts students are not required to take any engineering or technologyoriented courses.Engineering courses are deemed too technical for the non-engineers to take.At such colleges, the freshman-writing course is considered to be a venue to introduce young students to a mature level of analytical reading, thinking, discussion, and writing.A new experiment is being developed to make available to both engineering and non-engineering students a technical module on construction technology.The module is designed to introduce the liberal arts students in particular to highly technical aspects of the construction industry.It aims at allowing students to acquire appreciation for the complicated and carefully coordinated effort associated with the construction of sophisticated structures.Several types of structures and methods of construction techniques will be presented.The role played by different structural components in carrying and resisting expected loads will be discussed in detail.The structures covered in this module are suspension and cable-stayed bridges, towers, domes and shells, sea platforms, dams, tunnels and monuments.Each of these structures has its own special features, and their construction involves certain challenges that must be tackled in a well-planned manner.For non-engineering students, the module intends to make a meaningful contribution to their comprehension of the complicated nature of construction.This will be coupled with assigned technical readings on simple principles of load-supporting structural components.It is hoped that this module will serve as an eye opener for those who have never had any exposure to the building industry.It is also anticipated that the technical content planned for this course will help nonengineering students achieve a reasonable level of understanding of what could be a life-long useful knowledge.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207