MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886029561 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.10203

HELPING ENGINEERS DEVELOP AND EXERCISE CREATIVE MUSCLES

2018· article· en· W2886029561 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Zbigniew J. Pasek

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityCognitive reframingMultinational corporationIBMFrame (networking)Subject (documents)Engineering ethicsComputer scienceKnowledge managementEngineeringPsychologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract – A recent IBM-conducted survey of CEOs of multinational corporations indicated that creativity trumps other leadership characteristics. Across industries, organizations operate in increasingly complex and uncertain environments. Existing solutions are quickly exhausted or become obsolete, thus replacing them requires continuous innovation. Teaching existing solutions, the mainstay of formal education, is not enough. Students must learn how to consciously frame and reframe problems, create new knowledge and generate creative solutions on an ongoing basis. Most important, students must learn ways to motivate themselves to recognize and seek out problems as opportunities for generating creative solutions. 
 While in higher education importance of creativity is recognized, practical implementation of teaching it is still an afterthought or a sideline. While creativity as an academic subject is somewhat elusive, in particular in engineering education, recent accumulation of knowledge enables implementation of more systematic approaches.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207