MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405403348 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2024.080701

Research on Modern Machining Theory Reform under the Background of New Manufacturing Industries for Postgraduate Innovative Engineering Competencies

2024· article· en· W4405403348 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Technology and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Shanghai for Science and Technology
KeywordsMachiningManufacturing engineeringEngineeringEngineering managementManufacturingEngineering ethicsBusinessMechanical engineeringMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on the reform of the Modern Machining Theory curriculum to align with the evolving demands of new manufacturing industries. By emphasizing advanced materials processing, interdisciplinary integration, intelligent manufacturing, and green manufacturing, the curriculum is redesigned to enhance its cutting-edge relevance and practical applicability. Key measures include the adoption of blended learning, project-based learning, and virtual simulation practices to strengthen students' capabilities in intelligent and high-precision machining. Additionally, the evaluation system is restructured to incorporate project-based assessments, interdisciplinary integration, and process-oriented evaluations, encouraging students to develop comprehensive problem-solving skills and innovative thinking. These reforms aim to build an engineering-oriented and innovation-driven postgraduate talent cultivation system capable of addressing the complex challenges of modern manufacturing and research.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicEngineering Technology and MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207