MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401326522 · doi:10.1080/17581206.2024.2381739

Distinctive landmarks in the history of computing and engineering: the past, the present, and the future

2024· article· en· W4401326522 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for the History of Engineering & Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHistory of Computing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimelineTransformative learningHistory of computingKey (lock)ElectricityTRACE (psycholinguistics)Computer scienceUbiquitous computingPower (physics)Data scienceEngineeringArchitectural engineeringComputer securityElectrical engineeringHistoryHuman–computer interactionSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The history of computing cannot be discussed without acknowledging the engineering innovations that paved its way. Today, we carry more computing power in our pockets than it took to put a man on the moon. Across the world, ‘smart fever’ is on the rise, revealing our strong reliance on these smart devices. Designing such powerful devices would have been impossible, however, without an understanding of electricity and how it could be utilised to provide both power and control. This article highlights some key engineering innovations and the brilliant minds behind them. We trace the transformative journey of these concepts through the timeline of technology, from their humble beginnings as mere calculation machines to the powerful smart devices we rely on today.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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