MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993161502

Development of Creative Thinking in Elementary Color Teaching

2016· article· en· W2993161502 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ren Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Environments and Student Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemorizationNoveltyCreative thinkingCreativityComprehensionSet (abstract data type)Mathematics educationPsychologyFeelingDivergent thinkingComputer scienceSocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Creative thinking is a groundbreaking activity of mind, which is able to explore a new region of understanding and achieve new product of understanding. Creative thinking, which is based on abilities of feeling, memorizing, thinking, association and comprehension, is an advanced mental activity that featured as comprehensive, exploratory and novelty. It requires hard brain work. Development of creative thinking is considered as the top training topic in elementary color teaching. According to physical and psychological characters of children and rule of color teaching, thoughts of low grade students are abstract and have no set pattern. It brings difficulty, confusing and opportunity to our color teaching. As long as we understand the role of physical and psychological characters of children and match color teaching to the rule of low grade children, elementary students will show more creative thinking and their thoughts will fly in a colorful land.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.353 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicEducational Environments and Student OutcomesFrench-language works237,207