MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003130759 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.13779

BUILDING EFFECTIVE CASE STUDIES FOR MATERIALS

2019· article· en· W3003130759 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCuriosityClass (philosophy)Subject (documents)Mathematics educationCharacterization (materials science)Computer scienceProcess (computing)GraphPedagogyPsychologyWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligenceNanotechnologyMaterials scienceTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Case studies are used to guide students’ natural curiosity-driven learning instead of traditional content-heavy lectures. In collaboration with Dr. Marta Cerruti and one other co-teacher, I developed case studies for the undergraduate pre-requisite course “Analytical and Characterization Techniques” (MIME 317) to teach the material characterization concepts such as Atomic Absorption or UV/Vis spectroscopy in case-study driven manner. The process included understanding the professors’ desired learning outcomes and finding journal articles that used such concepts to solve real-world problems. Then, I developed handouts to simplify the complicated concepts presented in the articles and crafted questions that students with no background knowledge could still answer given the information provided and the figure/graph from the article. Finally, in delivering the case studies in class, I facilitated group discussion and found that guiding the discussion based on the students’ curiosity deepened their understanding of the subject.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.278 · 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