MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412870845 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2025.19687

Building Skills for Substainable Engineering: A Path to Carbon Emission Reduction

2025· article· en· W4412870845 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Yash Pareshkumar Vyas, M. Shehata, Lee Weissling, Nika Zolfaghari

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsProfessional Engineers OntarioToronto Metropolitan University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsReduction (mathematics)Path (computing)Carbon fibersEngineering physicsEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceComputer scienceMathematicsComposite materialComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change necessitates a skilled workforce to implement sustainable solutions, particularly in high-emission sectors like buildings. However, a gap exists between industry demands for sustainability skills and workforce preparedness. This study examines the alignment of educational practices with industry needs, identifying critical skill gaps and proposing strategies for integration into higher education. For this research, a qualitative approach was used, with structured interviews conducted with fifteen (15) experts in sustainability-related fields. Findings reveal that technical (e.g., life cycle analysis, energy efficiency) and soft skills (e.g., communication, leadership) are essential. Systems thinking and regulatory knowledge were particularly emphasized. Experts advocated for stronger academic-industry partnerships, integrated learning, and real-world training opportunities. Through the interviews, thirteen out of fifteen experts believed that the students need to understand how technical design should focus on the system as a whole.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207