MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7118140988 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2025.090619

Exploring a Project-Based Training Model for Engineering Undergraduates Driven by Model-Based Systems Engineering

2025· article· W7118140988 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Han Li, Kun Xia, Qingqing Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicSystems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Shanghai for Science and Technology
KeywordsEngineering educationProcess (computing)RestructuringSystem of systems engineeringTraining (meteorology)Engineering design processHealth systems engineeringScheme (mathematics)Model-driven architecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Engineering undergraduate education is facing increasing challenges as emerging industries such as artificial intelligence, integrated circuits, and the low-altitude economy rapidly develop. Modern engineering practice involves highly information-intensive, interdisciplinary, and complex systems, placing higher demands on students’ systems engineering capabilities. However, existing undergraduate engineering education models often suffer from insufficient industry-education integration and project-based teaching that lacks methodological support. To address these issues, this paper proposes a project-based training model driven by Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE), in which MBSE serves as the core methodological framework rather than a task or result-oriented supplement. An MBSE-lifecycle-driven framework is adopted to restructure project-based teaching, encompassing requirement capture, system modelling, subsystem design and integration, and verification and validation. The proposed model emphasizes process-oriented learning and systems thinking. Furthermore, a new industry-education collaboration mechanism with deep enterprise participation and a multi-perspective evaluation system based on MBSE process artifacts are established. The proposed approach provides a systematic pathway for enhancing undergraduates’ ability to solve complex engineering problems and offers a replicable paradigm for engineering education reform and talent cultivation in emerging industries.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
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 venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicSystems Engineering Methodologies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207