Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most valuable benefits of participating in EDGD is the opportunity to attend its conferences.Of all the professional conferences I attend, whether research or education related, my favorite by far is the EDGD Midyear Conference.At the Midyear, I truly feel that I am among friends and family.It is a collection of educators with common goals and interests, but the differences in their means and approaches are what make discussions exciting.The Midyear Conference is small enough to afford a personal touch, and the expenses are always kept to a reasonable level.If you haven't been to an EDGD conference lately, I fully encourage you to do so.While much can be learned from reading papers and watching webinars or video presentations, there is really no substitute for face-to-face discussion.Conferences are the places to make friends as well as professional contacts.They are places to discover new ideas, technologies, and different approaches to common problems.They are places to bounce your own ideas off others who can offer qualified opinions and advice.These types of interaction are best done at a personal level: over a meal, in the hallway, or on a tour.Remember that you can attend a conference even if you are not presenting a paper.I've done this more often than not, and I've always come away refreshed, inspired, and full of new ideas.The recent 68 th EDGD Midyear Conference, held on 20-22 October 2014 at Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Worchester MA, carried on the tradition of EDGD conferences that are well-organized, informative, and just plain fun.I wish to congratulate the organizers for a job well-done, especially Site Chair Holly Ault, and Program Chairs Nick Bertozzi and Kathryn Holliday-Darr.The 68 th Midyear boasted sixty participants from twenty different universities and five industrial partners (Autodesk, Parts Solutions, PTC, Schroff Development Corporation, and Solidworks).Seventeen technical papers were presented and four professional workshops were conducted.The event highlight was a most memorable dinner among the exhibits at the Worcester Art Museum.At the Midyear Conference, Lulu Sun and Heidi M. Steinhauer, won the Media Showcase Award for their presentation of, "Using Multimedia Online Learning Tools to Supplement the Classroom Instruction."The Oppenheimer Award was won by Thomas Delahunty, Niall Seery, and Raymond Lynch for their presentation of, "Conceptualization in Visuospatial Reasoning Tasks: A Research Direction."In addition the Lulu Sun and Christopher Grant were selected as winners of the 2013 Chair's Award for their paper, "Inquiry-Guided Learning (IGL) in Graphical Communications Course."These papers are fine examples of the expanding scope of the Division, encompassing topics such as visual and learning science, as well as traditional
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.883 | 0.812 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".