MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922118493 · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00666

Bioplastics in the General Chemistry Laboratory: Building a Semester-Long Research Experience

2019· article· en· W2922118493 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexandra M. Ward, Graeme R. A. Wyllie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanotechnology research and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia University of Edmonton
KeywordsBioplasticEngineering managementEngineering ethicsComputer scienceChemistryEngineeringMathematics educationPsychologyWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report here a second semester general chemistry laboratory project themed around chitosan-alginate bioplastics. With increasing awareness of plastic pollution in the environment and the awareness of the importance for materials which are either made from renewable resources or are biodegradable, this topic provides a relevant opportunity to engage students. The semester-long laboratory experience has students working in teams first to complete a series of core experiments which provide a foundational experience in preparing and testing chitosan-alginate bioplastics prior to developing and implementing a project in a direction of their own choosing. The benefit of these student directed research projects can include enhanced engagement and can allow development of skills such as experiment design, data collection and analysis, written and oral dissemination, and critical thinking. We describe here both the core module in bioplastics which has the potential to be incorporated as a self-contained module by interested parties along with the way in which this is expanded to incorporate the student directed projects.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0050.019
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical EducationSame topicNanotechnology research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207