Introducing and Integrating Machine Learning in an Operations Research Curriculum: An Application-Driven Course
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
Artificial intelligence (AI) and operations research (OR) have long been intertwined because of their synergistic relationship. Given the increasing popularity of AI and machine learning in particular, we face growing demand for educational offerings in this area from our students. This paper describes two courses that introduce machine learning concepts to undergraduate, predominantly industrial engineering and operations research students. Instead of taking a methods-first approach, these courses use real-world applications to motivate, introduce, and explore these machine learning techniques and highlight meaningful overlap with operations research. Significant hands-on coding experience is used to build student proficiency with the techniques. Student feedback indicates that these courses have greatly increased student interest in machine learning and appreciation of the real-world impact that analytics can have and helped students develop practical skills that they can apply. We believe that similar application-driven courses that connect machine learning and operations research would be valuable additions to undergraduate OR curricula broadly. Supplemental Material: Supplemental material is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/ited.2021.0256 .
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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