MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969702465 · doi:10.1145/2522848.2522896

A dynamic multimodal approach for assessing learners' interaction experience

2013· article· en· W1969702465 on OpenAlexaff
Imène Jraidi, Maher Chaouachi, Claude Frasson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBayesian networkMachine learningDynamic Bayesian networkArtificial intelligenceTask (project management)Probabilistic logicNaive Bayes classifierRotation formalisms in three dimensionsContext (archaeology)Bayesian probabilityHuman–computer interactionSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we seek to model the users' experience within an interactive learning environment. More precisely, we are interested in assessing three extreme trends in the interaction experience, namely flow (a perfect immersion within the task), stuck (a difficulty to maintain focused attention) and off-task (a drop out from the task). We propose a hierarchical probabilistic framework using a dynamic Bayesian network to simultaneously assess the probability of experiencing each trend, as well as the emotional responses occurring subsequently. The framework combines three-modality diagnostic variables that sense the learner's experience including physiology, behavior and performance, predictive variables that represent the current context and the learner's profile, and a dynamic structure that tracks the temporal evolution of the learner's experience. We describe the experimental study conducted to validate our approach. A protocol was established to elicit the three target trends as 44 participants interacted with three learning environments involving different cognitive tasks. Physiological activities (electroencephalography, skin conductance and blood volume pulse), patterns of the interaction, and performance during the task were recorded. We demonstrate that the proposed framework outperforms conventional non-dynamic modeling approaches such as static Bayesian networks, as well as three non-hierarchical formalisms including naive Bayes classifiers, decision trees and support vector machines.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningFrench-language works237,207