MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973840977 · doi:10.5539/ies.v6n5p92

Concept Based Approach for Adaptive Personalized Course Learning System

2013· article· en· W1973840977 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalizationComputer scienceComputerized adaptive testingAdaptive learningPersonalized learningCourse (navigation)Domain (mathematical analysis)Point (geometry)Test (biology)Instructional designArtificial intelligenceMultimediaTeaching methodMathematics educationCooperative learningOpen learningWorld Wide WebPsychologyMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most important factors for improving the personalization aspects of learning systems is to enable adaptive properties to them. The aim of the adaptive personalized learning system is to offer the most appropriate learning path and learning materials to learners by taking into account their profiles. In this paper, a new approach to adaptive personalized e-learning systems is proposed. This approach provides navigation on course materials, as well as navigations on course topics and domain concepts. In this approach, in addition to the difficulty of learning materials and course topics, students’ levels of knowledge and students’ understanding degrees on the course topics have also been taken into account. The Item Response Theory and Law of Total Probability have been used for estimating understanding degrees. The performance evaluation of the proposed approach has been tested by using the exam and project results, as well as grade point averages of the students from the Computer and Instructional Technology Department. The test results show the accuracy of the proposed method. It is believed that this study can improve the effectiveness of the adaptive e-learning system.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.278 · 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