Pith. Sign in

RECORD

The difficulties associated with integrating computation into undergraduate physics

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Ashleigh Leary, Paul W. Irving, Marcos D. Caballero

Physics Education · Submitted 10 Jul 2018

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim An important part of providing the necessary supports for integration is understanding and categorizing the problems members of this community of integrators face when integrating computation in their courses.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1807.03581 (version 1)
Pith ID6HMPSSE2, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationAshleigh Leary, Marcos D. Caballero, Paul W. Irving. "The difficulties associated with integrating computation into undergraduate physics." arXiv:1807.03581 (2018). https://pith.science/paper/6HMPSSE2
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,311 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.10 · human participants 0.95 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.02 · states quantitative result 0.03 · compares with prior results 0.05 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

From a department being resistant to change to students not buying into the new computational activities, the challenges that are faced with integrating computation into the physics undergraduate curriculum are varied. The Partnership for Integration of Computation into Undergraduate Physics (PICUP) aims to expand the role of computation in the undergraduate physics curriculum. The research presented in this paper is part of a larger project examining the role of the PICUP workshop in facilitating both the integration of computation into classrooms and developing a supportive community to support this integration. An important part of providing the necessary supports for integration is understanding and categorizing the problems members of this community of integrators face when integrating computation in their courses. Through individual and group interviews, we discuss the barriers to integration that new and experienced community members of PICUP have experienced in the past or perceive could exist in the future.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 From a department being resistant to change to students not buying into the new computational activities, the challenges that are faced with integrating computation into the physics undergraduate curriculum are varied. background 1.00 0.09 0.07 asserted 1.00
s1 The Partnership for Integration of Computation into Undergraduate Physics (PICUP) aims to expand the role of computation in the undergraduate physics curriculum. background 0.98 0.06 0.03 asserted 1.00
s2 The research presented in this paper is part of a larger project examining the role of the PICUP workshop in facilitating both the integration of computation into classrooms and developing a supportive community to support this integration. contribution 0.64 0.50 0.04 asserted 1.00
s3 An important part of providing the necessary supports for integration is understanding and categorizing the problems members of this community of integrators face when integrating computation in their courses. background 0.56 0.11 0.06 asserted 1.00
s4 Through individual and group interviews, we discuss the barriers to integration that new and experienced community members of PICUP have experienced in the past or perceive could exist in the future. method 0.97 0.91 0.04 asserted 0.83

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 0.97.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

From a department being resistant to change to students not buying into the new computational activities, the challenges that are faced with integrating computation into the physics undergraduate curriculum are varied. The Partnership for Integration of Computation into Undergraduate Physics (PICUP) aims to expand the role of computation in the undergraduate physics curriculum. The research presented in this paper is part of a larger project examining the role of the PICUP workshop in facilitating both the integration of computation into classrooms and developing a supportive community to support this integration. An important part of providing the necessary supports for integration is understanding and categorizing the problems members of this community of integrators face when integrating computation in their courses. Through individual and group interviews, we discuss the barriers to integration that new and experienced community members of PICUP have experienced in the past or perceive could exist in the future.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

How the literature uses it

1 arXiv paper cite this in 2 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 1 sentence without a confident label

Cites it as background 1 paper

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.