CLEAR IDEAS: Can Idea Implementation Training Enhance the Development of New Ideas Beyond Idea Generation Training?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We evaluated an individually focused version of the CLEAR IDEAS framework for innovation training. One hundred fifty online participants were randomly assigned to either an idea generation training (IDEAS), idea generation plus idea implementation training (CLEAR IDEAS), or a control group. Post‐test ratings of the quality of ideas produced and pre‐ and post‐test measures of creative self‐efficacy, general self‐efficacy, and motivation to innovate were gathered. Evaluation of the generated solutions by judges blind to the condition showed that the idea generation plus implementation training group and the idea generation‐only group produced ideas that were more novel, practical, and easier to implement, and had higher potential effectiveness than the control group. Ideas produced by the idea generation plus implementation group also had higher potential effectiveness than the idea generation‐only group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it