MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6944842090 · doi:10.19192/wsfip.sj4.2023.9

Outline of historical and problematic development of technical education.

2023· article· en· W6944842090 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Education Systems and Policies
Canadian institutionsNational Capital Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Technological changeScientific progressTechnical progressEmerging technologiesTechnology and society

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The era in which we currently live is .extremely extremely dominated by scientific and technological advances and technology, and has undergone significant changes over the past 230 years. The modern era is one in which technological innovations and scientific discoveries have had a huge impact on people's daily lives . The beginnings of attempts to conduct technical education in Poland date back to the 18th century , and over the following centuries the approach to this area hass evolved and changed . The adaptation of society to technological and scientific progress is crucial for the effective use of its benefits and to understand the changes that these innovations bring with them . Technical education aims not only to provide people with practical practical skills related to new technologies , but also to develop skills incl analytical thinking , problem-solving and adaptation to constant change . Nowadays , etc is crucially not only to learn how to use technology, but also to develop critical thinking skills to be able to evaluate and use these technologies responsibly .Today's technical education focuses on many areas , such as programming , engineering, science, computer science and digital technology.

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.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.360
GPT teacher head0.618
Teacher spread0.258 · 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