MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002800972 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.13859

APPLYING INDUSTRY 4.0 AND EDUCATION 4.0 TO ENGINEERING EDUCATION

2019· article· en· W3002800972 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Neaga Irina

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumEngineering managementAutomotive industryContext (archaeology)Engineering educationIndustry 4.0EngineeringBig dataAnalyticsWork (physics)Learning analyticsSupply chainHigher educationKnowledge managementEngineering ethicsBusinessComputer scienceData scienceSociologyPolitical sciencePedagogyMarketingMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research work-in-progress deals with a holistic analysis of the impacts of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) for engineering education especially for University undergraduate (level 4-6), master (level 7) and PhD related manufacturing, automotive engineering and supply chain management programmes in United Kingdom higher education institutions. This analysis aims at providing support for further consolidated recommendations to enable the development of higher education engineering curriculum for enhancing I4.0 application for smart organisations and industrial companies within the digital supply chains. Also the paper provides an analysis of advancement from digitalisation in engineering education to the implementation of Education 4.0 and related practices of smart labs, and simulation of smart factories leading at the learning factory. A conceptual framework to support the application of big data and learning analytics in the School of Engineering from University of Wales Trinity St David, Swansea, United Kingdom has been identified, discussed and intended to apply in the context of applying learning analytics.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations23
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207