MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392592216 · doi:10.3389/fsybi.2024.1337860

Bridging the gap: enhancing science communication in synthetic biology with specific teaching modules, school laboratories, performance and theater

2024· article· en· W4392592216 on OpenAlexaff
Franz‐Josef Schmitt, Marie Golüke, Nediljko Budiša

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Synthetic Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersTechnische Universität BerlinBrandenburger Staatsministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und KulturDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBridging (networking)Mathematics educationComputer scienceBiologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic biology, an interdisciplinary field merging biology, engineering, and computer science, holds significant promise but also gives rise to ethical and safety issues and concerns. Effective communication of scientific concepts is essential to bridge the gap between the scientific community and the general public. Here we present four communication strategies from our own experience that could help address this gap: (i) the teaching module “iGEM-Synthetic Biology”: Students at Technische Universität Berlin (TU Berlin) engage in synthetic biology projects, showcasing their work in a competition format that includes the creation of videos and websites. (ii) Long Night of the Sciences: Students and supervisors from the international Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) module at TU Berlin share their results with presentations, experiments, and quiz games during this public event. (iii) Theatre play: Festival für Freunde e.V. has developed a play titled “Life from the Toolbox” to explain genetic modification and synthetic biology for the audience. The play incorporates readings and educational videos. (iv) Heinz-Bethge-Foundation electron microscopy school lab: This laboratory utilizes hands-on experiments with microscopes, including electron microscopes, to visually explain intricate scientific concepts in physics, biology, and synthetic biology. It encourages high school students to delve deeper into the realm of science. These four initiatives represent a communication strategy that resonates with diverse audiences and is suitable to cover the public as a target group independent from their prior knowledge of the scientific background.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Synthetic BiologySame topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207