MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783644831 · doi:10.1115/imece2017-72290

Control Theory Practices Applied to Teaching Practical Control Theory

2017· article· en· W2783644831 on OpenAlexaff
Leo Stocco, Ignacio Galiano, Francisco Paz, Roberto Rosales, David Feixo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcome (game theory)Controller (irrigation)Set (abstract data type)Control (management)Computer scienceCourse (navigation)Range (aeronautics)Point (geometry)Control systemMacroControl engineeringControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Control theory is useful in a broad range of diverse applications that include mechanical, electrical and chemical systems. This work extends the application of control theory from achieving a desired technical outcome to achieving a desired pedagogical outcome. In this paper, the desired outcome is the teaching and learning of applied control systems theory. In the proposed model, the student is the plant, their skill set is the set point, the instructor is the controller, and either an exam or a project-based-learning (PBL) course is the sensor. The PBL course is used to evaluate the actual skill set of the students and the difference between the actual and desired skill set (error signal) is fed back to the professor to initiate curricular changes. This model is shown to be applicable at various levels. At the micro level, examinations within a course are used to optimize that course. At the intermediate level, a PBL course is used as the sensor for a conventional lecture-based course. At the macro level, the departmental program as a whole is matched to the needs of industry in pursuit of a 100% employment rate of its students.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207