Bibliographic record
Abstract
Another Banner Year for Undergraduate ResearchEach spring College of Sciences undergraduates present the results of their own research working with faculty mentors in subjects ranging from astronomy to zoology.Students use the same "poster session" format most professional scientists and mathematicians employ to communicate their work at national meetings within their disciplines.Standing near their large posters that summarize their results, the students answer questions from both faculty and their own peers.The experience stands the undergraduates in good stead before they go to professional meetings on their own.The spring event at WSU is called the College of Sciences Undergraduate Research Poster Competition.In recent years it has been held at the Beasley Coliseum.In the spring of 2008 a record-breaking number of undergraduates participated, presenting research work from every part of the College of Sciences.As usual, faculty evaluated the student-presenters, giving prizes and awards in mathematics, and in biological and physical sciences.For the first time, prizes were also given in nontraditional categories of research that perhaps cut across college disciplines, such as environmental work."Each year I'm more impressed not just with the numbers of participants, but the quality of the research work our undergrads are doing," said Dean of Sciences Michael Griswold."It's a treat for me to see all that our students are doing, and the good work of the faculty in supporting and advising them."Alumni and friends are heartily welcome at the event.The next date for the poster competition presenta tions is March 30, 2009.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.631 | 0.460 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".