MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576243606 · doi:10.3233/978-1-60750-028-5-257

Discovering Causal Models of Self-Regulated Learning

2009· book-chapter· en· W1576243606 on OpenAlexaff
David Brokenshire

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsAthabasca UniversitySimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePsychologyCognitive scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New statistical methods allow discovery of causal models from observational data in some circumstances. These models permit both probabilistic and causal inference for models of reasonable size. Many domains can benefit from such methods. Educational research does not easily lend itself to experimental investigation. Research in laboratories is artificial while research in authentic environments is complex and difficult to control. The variables are typically hidden and change over the long term, making them challenging and expensive to investigate experimentally. In addressing these issues, we present an analysis of causal discovery algorithms and their applicability to educational research and learning technology, an engineered causal model of Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) theory based on the literature, and an evaluation of the potential for discovering such a model from observational data using statistical methods.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applicationsSame topicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningFrench-language works237,207