MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737226774 · doi:10.11575/prism/10230

The 13th International CDIO Conference Proceedings - Full Papers

2017· article· en· W2737226774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristina Edström, Ronald J. Hugo, Janne Roslöf, Robert Songer, Daniel P. Spooner

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCDIOPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsLibrary scienceEngineeringEngineering educationComputer scienceEngineering management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CDIO approach is an innovative educational framework for producing the next generation of engineers. The aim is an education that supports students in the acquisition of strong technical fundamentals while simultaneously developing the necessary professional skills required of a practicing engineer. This is done by providing students with dual-impact learning experiences that are based upon the lifecycle of an engineering project, the Conceiving – Designing – Implementing – Operating (CDIO) of real-world products, processes, and systems. Throughout the world, more than 135 institutions have adopted CDIO as the framework of their curriculum development. The Annual International Conference is the main meeting of the CDIO Initiative and it includes presentations of papers as well as special seminars, workshops, roundtables, events and activities. The 13th International CDIO Conference takes place in Calgary, Canada, June 18–22, 2017, hosted by the Schulich School of Engineering at the University of Calgary. The organizers together with the City of Calgary welcome you to the event! The main theme of this year is Engineering Education in the Digital Age. It is visible in the keynote presentations, paper presentations, roundtables and workshops. The rich topical program will facilitate lively discussion and contribute to further advancement of engineering education. The conference includes two types of contributions, Full Papers and Projects in Progress. The Full Papers fall into three tracks: Advances in CDIO, CDIO Implementation, and Engineering Education Research. All Full Papers have undergone a full single-blind review process to meet scholarly standards. The CDIO Projects in Progress contributions describe current activities and initial developments, and were selected by the program committee co-chairs based on the submitted abstracts. Originally, 170 abstracts were submitted to the conference. The authors of the accepted Full Paper abstracts submitted 108 Full Paper manuscripts to the peer review process. During the review, 310 review reports were filed by 91 members of the 2017 International Program Committee. Acceptance decisions were made based on these reviews. The reviewers’ constructive remarks served as valuable support to the authors of the accepted full papers when they prepared the final versions of their contributions. We want to address our warmest thanks to those who participated in the rigorous review process. This publication contains the 102 accepted full papers that will be presented at the conference, of which 5 are Advances in CDIO; 48 CDIO Implementation; and 11 Engineering Education Research. These papers have been written by 173 different authors representing 30 countries. This book is available as an electronic publication only. In addition to the Full Papers, 32 CDIO Project in Progress contributions will be presented at the conference and are not included in this publication. We hope that you find these contributions valuable in developing your own research, curriculum development, and teaching practice, ultimately furthering the engineering profession. We also hope that you benefit through the truly unique community of practice that exists within the CDIO Initiative. A total of 80 universities from 35 countries, representing six continents, will be present during the conference. Seize the opportunity to discuss and share with colleagues, as global awareness and partnerships are of major importance in the education of the next generation of engineers. Wishing all of you a wonderful CDIO 2017 experience! Calgary, June 15, 2017

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207