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 OpenAlexaff
Michael Guerzhoy, Marion Neumann, Emmanuel Johnson, David Johnson, Henry Chai, Daniel Garijo, Zhuoyue Lyu, Christopher J. MacLellan

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.006

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAI MattersSame topicEthics and Social Impacts of AIFrench-language works237,207