MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324139158 · doi:10.26685/urncst.469

SciNapse 2022-2023 Undergraduate Science Case Competition: Neuroscience and The Future

2023· article· en· W4324139158 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebecca Krnel, Andréanne Ménard

Bibliographic record

VenueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsCompetition (biology)Undergraduate educationPsychologyUndergraduate researchTest (biology)Engineering ethicsMedical educationEngineeringEcologyMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The SciNapse Undergraduate Science Case Competition (USCC) provides an opportunity for undergraduate students to experience the development of a novel research proposal. A case is presented to all participants and, using in-depth literature search (publications, reports, studies, and published writings), students connect and pinpoint key elements allowing them to develop a hypothesis in support of the case in question. Participants also develop a methodology which will test the validity of their hypothesis. This year’s case topic focused on the still emerging discipline of neuroscience and its far-reaching implications for the future of human and societal development. In teams of 1-4, undergraduate students tackled the case and provided novel research ideas that may lead to major advancements in neuroscience and its related fields. In total, the 2022-2023 USCC attracted 314 undergraduate students from 12 universities across North America. The top 25% of written submissions in each division are highlighted in this abstract booklet. You may find more information on the annual SciNapse USCC on our website at http://scinapsescience.com.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.033
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.354 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) JournalSame topicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207