MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384206153 · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00189

Quantitative Assessment on the Effectiveness of a Formal Charge Method for Constructing Lewis (Electron Dot) Structures

2023· article· en· W4384206153 on OpenAlex
Owen J. Curnow, Jason K. Pearson

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicVarious Chemistry Research Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Prince Edward IslandAtlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
KeywordsCharge (physics)Formal chargeElectronComputer scienceMathematics educationPhysicsMathematicsMoleculeNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effectiveness of a formal charge method to draw Lewis structures that was developed by Curnow was studied quantitatively by direct comparison of two groups of students: one of which was taught the new formal charge method and another that was taught a traditional method. Students’ marks on a common assessment were found to improve by approximately 5% when taught the formal charge method, and students who used this method were able to identify the correct answer with fewer attempts. These differences were found to be statistically significant.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.389 · 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