MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887792599 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.7347

Tron Days: Horizontal Integration and Authentic Learning

2017· article· en· W2887792599 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Eugene Li, Chris Rennick, Carol Hulls, Mary Ann Robinson, Michael Cooper-Stachowsky, Eline Boghaert, William Melek, Sanjeev Bedi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechatronicsEvent (particle physics)Style (visual arts)Connection (principal bundle)Science and engineeringMathematics educationComputer scienceEngineeringPsychologyVisual artsEngineering ethicsArtificial intelligenceArtMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—First year Mechatronics students at the University ofWaterloo consistently do not see the connection between their fundamentalmath and science courses with the practise of engineering.To address this issue, the first year instructors came together tolaunch a two day Hackathon style project for the students calledTron Days. Tron Days featured small warm up problems dealingwith advanced concepts in each of the courses, and big problemsthat drew from all of the first year courses. The challenges onlyhad communication marks associated with them and provided anopportunity for sustained engagement with the concepts. The metricsused to measure the event showed that it was successful at addressingthe desired outcomes, but could be further enhanced to address morematerial.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.018
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.185
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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