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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
concerning introductory calculus were discussed. It was apparent that there were many common issues facing post secondary institutions in Alberta, and an initiative to organize a meeting at the Banff International Research Station (BIRS) was undertaken. Some of the challenges arising: • Concern about standards varying from instructor to instructor and institution to institution both with regards to curriculum and assessment. • Perceived pressure on mathematics departments and individual mathematics faculty both by administration and other departments to meet some success rate in the introductory calculus classes. • Questioning of the value of calculus and its aims by other departments and administration. • Stress and anxiety felt by students who are taking or are planning to take Introductory Calculus. There is need for leadership in the province in meeting these challenges in the age of technology and the prevalence of the internet. Related to these issues mentioned above is the notion of where technology fits, what should be the role of the calculator in a calculus course, what role does/can/should the internet play in addressing some of the issues outlined above. The plan was to address many of these outstanding issues in a coordinated way and consequently increase the student satisfaction and success rates at the various institutions in their introductory calculus courses. The outcome of all this was the 2-day workshop “Calculus 11 × 11 × 11, ” held November 11-13, 2011, at the BIRS. All six Alberta universities were present and many of the Alberta post secondary colleges, plus one college from BC. The primary focus was the teaching of calculus in the high schools, colleges, and universities in Alberta. It also included representatives from Alberta Education, and two students who presented valuable insights from their point of view. 2
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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 it