Bibliographic record
Abstract
T his activity was used in introductory level ethics courses in a four-year college and a research university, usually three quarters of the way through the semester.Timing is important because students require preliminary training in asking philosophical questions of right and wrong, and there must be adequate instructor rapport (and peer rapport) to make a rather unruly in-class activity successful.This activity has been used both as an introduction to the unit on social contract as a whole-Hobbes, Rousseau, and Rawls, as I taught it-or as a capping off activity to question the overall learning in the unit.Both strategies have merit, though using it as a capping off activity allows the instructor to draw on vocabulary such as "state of nature" and "principles of distribution."Props are required, notably a bag of smaller marbles or similar tokens-enough so each student can have at least three-and optional larger marbles.I ask students to get up from their desks and push away obstacles so they can easily circulate in the room.I write "out of marbles" on the front whiteboard, indicating where to stand or sit once out of marbles.Sometimes, I start by giving every student the same amount or marbles; other times I divide students by birth month and give one group three marbles and another group two.Either way, students start with what they perceive to be a "fair" distribution, with optional random distributions such as the one by birth month.Sometimes, I will throw in a curveball and give a handful to a random student, quieting student protests by saying that everyone has what they need to play, this was just an additional "lottery win" or luck.I then ask them to play rock, paper, scissors, handing over one marble when they lose.After a few minutes, a handful of students are at the whiteboard, a handful are in the middle with a few marbles, and one or more has a large number of marbles.Some will quietly quit playing, because they want to keep their two or three marbles and not risk them.The person with a large number of marbles tends to be the one wanting to challenge others more, since they have a safe number.At
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.174 | 0.037 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".