MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1542671449 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v16i2.2016

Measuring disorientation based on the Needleman-Wunsch algorithm

2015· article· en· W1542671449 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tolga Güyer, Bilal Atasoy, Sibel Somyürek

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePath (computing)Measure (data warehouse)Process (computing)AlgorithmMatching (statistics)Similarity (geometry)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningData miningImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="Abstract"><span style="font-size: 10px;">This study offers a new method to measure navigation disorientation in web based systems which is powerful learning medium for distance and open education. The Needleman-Wunsch algorithm is used to measure disorientation in a more precise manner. The process combines theoretical and applied knowledge from two previously distinct research areas, disorientation and string-matching. String-matching algorithms provide a more convenient disorientation measurement than other techniques, in that they examine the similarity between an optimal path and learners’ navigation paths. The algorithm particularly takes into account the contextual similarity between partly relevant web-pages in a user’s navigation path and pages in an optimal path. This study focuses on the reasons and the required steps to use this algorithm for disorientation measurement. Examples of actual student activities and learning environment data are provided to illustrate the process.</span></p>

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207