Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) exist on the market today. A subset of a LMS is the component in which student assessment is managed. In some forms of assessment, such as open questions, the LMS is incapable of evaluating the students' responses and therefore human intervention is necessary. In order to assess at higher levels of Bloom's (1956) taxonomy, it is necessary to include open-style questions in which the student is given the task as well as the freedom to arrive at a response without the comfort of recall words and/or phrases. Automating the assessment process of open questions is an area of research that has been ongoing since the 1960s. Earlier work focused on statistical or probabilistic approaches based primarily on conceptual understanding. Recent gains in Natural Language Processing have resulted in a shift in the way in which free text can be evaluated. This has allowed for a more linguistic approach which focuses heavily on factual understanding. This study will leverage the research conducted in recent studies in the area of Natural Language Processing, Information Extraction and Information Retrieval in order to provide a fair, timely and accurate assessment of student responses to open questions based on the semantic meaning of those responses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".