MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366779921 · doi:10.32370/ia_2023_03_7

Mathematical Models as a Key to Effective Teaching of Set Theory at Undergraduate Level

2023· article· en· W4366779921 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Key (lock)Computer scienceSet theoryMathematics educationMathematical theoryManagement scienceMathematicsEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper is dedicated to the problem of optimization of teaching set theory at undergraduate level (as a part of Mathematical Logics course). The authors’ original method of using mathematical models for teaching set theory is presented. Concrete recommendations for increasing effectiveness of teaching set theory are given. The paper contains original mathematical models which were proved to promote deep understanding of the key concepts of set theory in students, as well as their ability to apply those concepts to solving real-life problems. All conclusions and recommendations are based on the results of modern research in education and on the authors’ teaching experience. The effectiveness of presented technique was proven in practical teaching at Voorhees University, South Carolina, USA and at Denmark Technical College, South Carolina, USA.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.005

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.262 · 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