MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2908184991

The Possible Ways of Practicing Complexity Theory through Concept Study in Mathematics Class

2018· article· en· W2908184991 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChaos, Complexity, and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationProcess (computing)Computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the ways that the complexity theory can be practiced in mathematics class to encourage
\nstudents’ participation in learning of the mathematical concepts. The paper starts by introducing the theory
\nand its associated attributes which are necessary to organize the class for the individual and collective
\nunderstandings of the mathematical concepts during teaching and learning process. After that, the paper
\nillustrates the ways that the attributes of complexity theory can be practiced in mathematics class under the
\nlens of concept study, a model for teachers’ professional development of the mathematical concepts (Davis &
\nRenert, 2014). The paper ends by providing the potential of practicing complexity theory in mathematics
\nclass.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0060.002
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 head0.549
GPT teacher head0.581
Teacher spread0.033 · 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