MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396893577 · doi:10.17975/sfj-2024-004

2023-2024 High school big data challenge: Leveraging generative ai and data cybersecurity to conserve and foster local biodiversityUnder the Patronage of the Canadian Commission for UNESCO

2024· article· en· W4396893577 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSTEM Fellowship Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLaw, AI, and Intellectual Property
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataComputer securityBiodiversityComputer scienceBusinessData scienceData miningBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The STEM Fellowship High School Big Data Challenge provides students with the unique opportunity of Open Data inquiry into one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and experiential learning of fundamentals of data analysis – an essential skill set for a young researcher in the digital age. This year, students explore Generative AI and Data Cybersecurity to Conserve and Foster Local Biodiversity and to suggest their own evidence-based solutions following the principles of Open Science. They investigated different topics, ranging from Enhancing Forest Fire Predictions with Sequential Models for Ecosystem Preservation and Public Safety to Leveraging Semantic Segmentation to Perform Wildfire Prediction. We designed an interdisciplinary and agile educational environment, and in-depth learning modules for students as a means of bridging the gap between traditional high school courseware and digital reality and computational science. Students learned how to uncover hidden patterns and trends in structured and unstructured data using a range of data analytics tools and programming languages. Python, R, LaTeX, and machine learning were some of the tools the students learned and used. On behalf of the STEM Fellowship, we extend our sincere congratulations to all students who participated in the challenge, and wish them the best for their future endeavours. We want to express our appreciation to all the mentors and volunteers. This program would not be possible without patronage of CC UNESCO and generous support of our sponsors: RBC Future Launch, Let’s Talk Science, CISCO Networking Academy, Canadian Science Publishing, Schulich Foundation, SciNet at University of Toronto, and the University of Calgary Hunter Hub for Entrepreneurial Thinking. We were privileged to witness first-hand the analytical capabilities of the data-native generation of students, and we are confident they will demonstrate excellence throughout their academic and professional careers.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTEM Fellowship JournalSame topicLaw, AI, and Intellectual PropertyFrench-language works237,207