MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6912328675 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.16736085

Praktikum Digitalisierung: Data Literacy right from the start

2025· article· en· W6912328675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Table (database)CurriculumQuality (philosophy)Transparency (behavior)SoftwareMeasure (data warehouse)Tracking (education)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data literacy is a necessary and critical engineering skill. However, integrating this skill into the existing curriculum is not without challenges. Exercises should encourage students to re-sponsibly manage data from the very beginning while they independently plan, execute, and document their research. Students must experience modern Research Data Management (RDM) as an integral part of the scientific method that ensures trust in their scientific and de-sign process through transparency and sustainability. Exercises must also help them to devel-op their analytical and synthetic skills [1]. To accomplish these objectives, the Chair of Fluid Systems developed and validated a new undergraduate course, Praktikum Digitalisierung, extending an established courses on exper-imental work. The students learn digital literacy through a series of design tasks and experi-ments accompanied by FAIR data pipelines [2]. "Kitchen table experiments" serve as prepara-tion for more sophisticated laboratory experiments and allows students to carry out hands-on experiments in their own home, using everyday objects for scientific practice. They are sup-ported by a portable hardware kit, shown in Fig.2, that includes a Raspberry Pi with all neces-sary software and multiple sensors. Four exercises currently form the course: (1) A system design evaluation with FAIR quality KPIs: Students design a vehicle in LeoCAD combining LEGO components from a repository featuring PIDs and semantic metadata. They evaluate the quality of their design by tracking and aggregating the components data and calculating KPIs. (2) Application of temperature sensors to measure temperature histories and determine caloric properties of materials. (3) Using acceleration sensors to measure vibrations of a Laval rotor. (4) A Hele-Shaw cell analy-sis experiment visualizes fluid flow instabilities. Each analysis experiment requires students to integrate digital sensor setups, collect and analyze data (e.g., performing signal processing or image processing on experimental data), and apply statistical methods for interpretation as appropriate. The course leverages a range of software tools within a FAIR data life cycle (Fig. 1) linking data sources to the data sinks. Python is used for data acquisition and analysis, with experi-ments scripted and analyzed in interactive Jupyter notebooks. GitLab is used to control ver-sions of software and setups, and experimental data is stored in structured form using HDF5 files. Semantic graphs link the hardware, datasets, experimental conditions, and results, illus-trating how interoperable metadata can make data more meaningful and reusable while form-ing FAIR Digital Objects or FAIR data products. Praktikum Digitalisierung was developed within the context of the authors' involvement in the NFDI4ING initiative and the associated DALIA training and education platform, serving as a best practice example for engineering and other communities. In conclusion, it demonstrates that introducing FAIR-aligned RDM training into the existing curriculum is not only feasible but highly beneficial. It cultivates a new generation of engineers who are fluent in both the physical principles of their discipline as the management of data that underpins scientific insight, there-by strengthening open, transparent, and reproducible engineering practice from the ground up. References [1] P. Pelz et al., "Datenkompetenz von Anfang an!", 2021, https://doi.org/10.26083/tuprints-00019904. [2] M. D. Wilkinson et al., "The fair guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship," Scientific data, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2016. [3] L. Cong, M. M. G. Kuhr, and P. F. Pelz, "Information package about Praktikum Digitalisie-rung," Zenodo, Dec. 10, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14357857

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.012
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.011

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207