MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388909902 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2023.10.994

Teaching Engineering Design for Industry 4.0 Using a Cyber-Physical Learning Factory

2023· article· en· W4388909902 on OpenAlexaff
Johanna Chelini, Dean Richert

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceScope (computer science)Graduation (instrument)Cyber-physical systemTeamworkEngineering managementFactory (object-oriented programming)EngineeringCurriculumIndustry 4.0Knowledge managementComputer scienceManagementPsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Training students in the Industry 4.0 era presents a unique challenge to educators. The rapid development and adoption of new technology in the manufacturing sector means that engineering programs are continually trying to catch up to the state-of-the-art. When the training approach is focused on specific technologies, the skills that students gain have a narrow scope and quickly become obsolete. In this paper, we present a pedagogical approach that emphasizes the development of transferrable skills that remain relevant even in the dynamic Industry 4.0 age. We use a project-based learning approach and a cyber-physical learning factory to teach students engineering design, modern tool usage, and individual and teamwork. Students who engage in this learning approach are better prepared to keep pace with industrial trends after graduation.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207