Hasil untuk "Science"

E. W. Skinner, R. Phillips

R. Merton

W. Weaver

Abrar Ahmad

Steven Shapin

Birger Hjørland, H. Albrechtsen

M. Poliakoff, J. M. Fitzpatrick, T. R. Farren et al.

S. Palmer

G. DeBoer

Heather Douglas

P. Kitcher

M. D. Schwartz

A. Clark

Xiaoming Zhai, Kent Crippen

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into science education is transforming the design and function of learning materials, offering new affordances for personalization, authenticity, and accessibility. This chapter examines how AI technologies are transforming science learning materials across six interrelated domains: 1) integrating AI into scientific practice, 2) enabling adaptive and personalized instruction, 3) facilitating interactive simulations, 4) generating multimodal content, 5) enhancing accessibility for diverse learners, and 6) promoting co-creation through AI-supported content development. These advancements enable learning materials to more accurately reflect contemporary scientific practice, catering to the diverse needs of students. For instance, AI support can enable students to engage in dynamic simulations, interact with real-time data, and explore science concepts through multimodal representations. Educators are increasingly collaborating with generative AI tools to develop timely and culturally responsive instructional resources. However, these innovations also raise critical ethical and pedagogical concerns, including issues of algorithmic bias, data privacy, transparency, and the need for human oversight. To ensure equitable and meaningful science learning, we emphasize the importance of designing AI-supported materials with careful attention to scientific integrity, inclusivity, and student agency. This chapter advocates for a responsible, ethical, and reflective approach to leveraging AI in science education, framing it as a catalyst for innovation while upholding core educational values.

Siddhartha Visveswara Jayanti

I describe my experience writing the first original, modern Computer Science research paper expressed entirely in an Indian language. The paper is in Telugu, a language with approximately 100 million speakers. The paper is in the field of distributed computing and it introduces a technique for proving epistemic logic based lower bounds for multiprocessor algorithms. A key hurdle to writing the paper was developing technical terminology for advanced computer science concepts, including those in algorithms, distributed computing, and discrete mathematics. I overcame this challenge by deriving and coining native language scientific terminology through the powerful, productive, Pāninian grammar of Samskrtam. The typesetting of the paper was an additional challenge, since mathematical typesetting in Telugu is underdeveloped. I overcame this problem by developing a Telugu XeLaTeX template, which I call TeluguTeX. Leveraging this experience of writing an original computer science research paper in an Indian language, I lay out a vision for how to ameliorate the state of scientific writing at all levels in Indic languages -- languages whose native speakers exceed one billion people -- through the further development of the Sanskrit technical lexicon and through technological internationalization.

Akhil S. Nair, Lucas Foppa

Active learning (AL) plays a critical role in materials science, enabling applications such as the construction of machine-learning interatomic potentials for atomistic simulations and the operation of self-driving laboratories. Despite its widespread use, the reliability and effectiveness of AL workflows depend on implicit design assumptions that are rarely examined systematically. Here, we critically assess AL workflows deployed in materials science and investigate how key design choices, such as surrogate models, sampling strategies, uncertainty quantification and evaluation metrics, relate to their performance. By identifying common pitfalls and discussing practical mitigation strategies, we provide guidance to practitioners for the efficient design, assessment, and interpretation of AL workflows in materials science.

Emanuele Ratti

The past few years have witnessed an increasing use of machine learning (ML) systems in science. Paul Humphreys has argued that, because of specific characteristics of ML systems, human scientists are pushed out of the loop of science. In this chapter, I investigate to what extent this is true. First, I express these concerns in terms of what I call epistemic control. I identify two conditions for epistemic control, called tracking and tracing, drawing on works in philosophy of technology. With this new understanding of the problem, I then argue against Humphreys pessimistic view. Finally, I construct a more nuanced view of epistemic control in ML-based science.

D. Sarewitz, R. Pielke

D. Troy, Joseph P. Kerry

F. Collins