MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405944174 · doi:10.1007/979-8-8688-1061-9_5

Design What You Need to Learn

2024· book-chapter· en· W4405944174 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Parra Pennefather

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign Thinking · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nasreddin was walking down the street when he saw a group of people gathered around a well, looking very worried. They explained that the moon had fallen into the well and asked Nasreddin to help get it out. Without missing a beat, Nasreddin fetched a rope and a hook, then threw it into the well. After a few minutes of fishing around, the hook caught on something. Nasreddin pulled with all his might, and the hook broke free, sending him sprawling onto his back. As he lay there, he saw the moon shining brightly in the sky. “Praise be!” he exclaimed. “It's a good thing I fell, or the moon would never have gotten back into the sky!”

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)0.006
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1130.080

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueDesign ThinkingSame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207