MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7061461993

Power Point and teaching

2020· article· en· W7061461993 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

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Generation Technologies
Canadian institutionsThe King's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101DysgeusiaLiquationDiafiltrationEmperipolesisDurvalumabTriacetin
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If I owned a whiffle bat I'd reach for it next time I read that technology will solve all of our teaching problems. In any given issue of Wired, the sacred temple of the technoligious, you'll find apostles of the Internet proclaiming that the end of teachers is at hand. It is not a new argument - they used to say it about filmstrips and probably said it about chalk, too. So don't mistake me for one of them. But I would like to describe how I have, successfully I think, incorporated PowerPoint into my lectures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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