AN INTERNATIONAL CROSS-DISCIPLINARY STUDENT COLLABORATION: A RETROSPECTIVE EIGHT YEARS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A successful construction endeavour invariably obliges a successful collaborative effort among its many multi-disciplinary stakeholders.Teachers of construction education today are increasingly aware of the need to teach their students skills to enable them to work collaboratively with their peers from other related disciplines.In the present day context of an increasingly globalized construction industry amidst a current rapid advancement in communication technology, an ability to work collaboratively with peers across a geographical divide within an online environment is a valuable skill to have.This paper presents the collective experiences of two distant universities where students from two related disciplines -architectural science (with a construction project management major) and civil engineering -collaborate on a joint student assignment across a time and geographical divide.It presents a description of the project and its intent, teaching pedagogy, students' feedback and the challenges of establishing the framework.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".