MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382463660 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v37i13.27091

A Dataset for Learning University STEM Courses at Scale and Generating Questions at a Human Level

2023· article· en· W4382463660 on OpenAlexaff
Iddo Drori, Sarah Zhang, Zad Chin, Reece Shuttleworth, Albert Lu, Linda Chen, Bereket Birbo, Michele He, Pedro Lantigua, Sunny Tran, Gregory Hunter, Bo Feng, Newman Cheng, Roman Wang, Yann Hicke, Saisamrit Surbehera, Arvind Raghavan, Alexander E. Siemenn, Nikhil Singh, Jayson Lynch, Avi Shporer, Nakul Verma, Tonio Buonassisi, Armando Solar-Lezama

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Science and engineeringMathematics educationDozenFoundation (evidence)Earth system scienceComputer scienceData scienceEngineeringEngineering ethicsMathematicsEcologyGeographyBiologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new dataset for learning to solve, explain, and generate university-level STEM questions from 27 courses across a dozen departments in seven universities. We scale up previous approaches to questions from courses in the departments of Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science and Engineering, Chemistry, Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Physics, Earth Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Economics, Mathematics, Biological Engineering, Data Systems, and Society, and Statistics. We visualize similarities and differences between questions across courses. We demonstrate that a large foundation model is able to generate questions that are as appropriate and at the same difficulty level as human-written questions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.011

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207