MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167599977 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14649504.v1

Team Beam: Economizing Children’s Bee-Havioral Development

2021· preprint· en· W3167599977 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Conley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsProfessional Engineers OntarioWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)IncentiveWork (physics)PsychologyProcess (computing)Personal developmentApplied psychologyPublic relationsKnowledge managementEngineeringSociologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research paper uses behavioral economics to design a children’s play installation that facilitates soft skill development. By reviewing existing literature from Education, Early Development and Behavioral Economics, my installation supports improvements in collaborative behaviours within child-child and parent-child relationships. Literature across research disciplines explains how early soft skill achievement influences life course outcomes at school, work, home and in personal relationships. The installation’s user difficulty, material composition, colouring and incentives nudge children aged 2–4 toward making emotionally beneficial decisions. Because it is designed for a museum setting, the assumed expectations of installation users, other visitors and the host museum are acknowledged in the design. The installation’s assumed effectiveness, specific location and accessibility features are produced from personal work experiences at the Royal Ontario Museum, interviews with field professionals, attention to parents’ agency, existing literature focused on inclusive, play-based spaces and an iterative creative process based on design thinking methodology.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207