MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312940262 · doi:10.1145/3557785.3557789

EAAI-22 Blue Sky Ideas in Artificial Intelligence Education from the AAAI/ACM SIGAI New and Future AI Educator Program

2022· article· en· W4312940262 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAI Matters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumDiversity (politics)Leverage (statistics)Artificial intelligenceComputer sciencePsychologyPedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 12th Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence (EAAI-22, cochaired by Michael Guerzhoy and Marion Neumann) continued the AAAI/ACM SIGAI New and Future AI Educator Program to support the training of early-career university faculty, secondary school faculty, and future educators (PhD candidates or postdocs who intend a career in academia). As part of the program, awardees were asked to address one of the following "blue sky" questions: •How could/should AI courses incorporate AI Ethics into the curriculum? •How could we teach AI topics at an early undergraduate or a secondary school level? •AI has the potential for broad impact to numerous disciplines. How could we make AI education more interdisciplinary, specifically to benefit non-engineering fields? •How should standard AI courses evolve? •How could we leverage AI education to promote diversity in the field? This paper is a collection of their responses, intended to help motivate discussion around these issues in AI education.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.350 · 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