MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943037753 · doi:10.1145/3290607.3298994

EduCHI 2019 Symposium

2019· article· en· W2943037753 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumEngineering ethicsDisciplinePedagogySociologyEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At CHI 2018, a workshop on developing a community of practice to support global HCI education was held, building on six years of research and collaboration in the area of HCI education. Many themes emerged from the workshop activities and discussions. Two particularly stood out: creating channels for discussions related to HCI education and providing a platform for sharing HCI curricula and teaching experiences. To that end, we are organizing a CHI 2019 symposium dedicated exclusively to HCI education: EduCHI 2019: Global Perspectives on HCI Education. The symposium will focus on the canons of HCI education in 2019 and beyond. It will offer a venue for HCI educators across disciplinary and geographical borders to discuss, dissect, and debate HCI teaching and learning. Through keynote addresses, paper presentations, and a panel discussion, we aim to discuss current and future HCI education trends, curricula, pedagogies, teaching practices, and diverse and inclusive HCI education. Post-symposium initiatives will aim to document and publish the discussions from the symposium.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.008

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207