MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197536806 · doi:10.14778/3476311.3476394

The future of data(base) education

2021· article· en· W3197536806 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary G. Ives, Rachel Pottinger, Arun Kumar, Johannes Gehrke, Jana Giceva

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityField (mathematics)Computer scienceMathematics educationPosition (finance)Base (topology)Core (optical fiber)Data sciencePsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This panel encourages a debate over the future of database education and its relationship to Data Science: Are Computer Science (CS) and Data Science (DS) different disciplines about to split, and how does that effect how we teach our field? Is there a "data" course that belongs in CS that all of our students should take? Who is the traditional database course, e.g. based on the "cow book", relevant to? What traditional topics should we not be teaching in our core data course(s) and which ones should be added? What do we teach the student who has one elective for data science? How does our community position itself for leadership in CS given the popularity of DS?

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 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 score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207