MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014744489 · doi:10.1145/2702123.2702424

Providing Adaptive Support in an Interactive Simulation for Learning

2015· article· en· W2014744489 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInteractive simulationProcess (computing)Adaptive learningHuman–computer interactionExploratory researchInteractive LearningIntervention (counseling)Open sourceMultimediaSimulationArtificial intelligenceSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent rise of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) with unlimited participants, makes employing learning tools such as interactive simulations all but inevitable. Interactive simulations give students the opportunity to experiment with concrete examples and develop better understanding of concepts they have learned. However, some students do not learn well from this relatively unstructured form of interaction, suggesting the provision of adaptive support as a way to address this issue. This paper presents a formal evaluation of providing support to facilitate open exploration. We describe the process of designing an intervention delivery mechanism for adding adaptive support to an exploratory interactive simulation. The experimental evaluation of the adaptive version of the simulation indicates that the adaptive support provided to students significantly improved their learning performance. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations of users' acceptance of the system are generally positive but pinpoint areas for improvement.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.236 · 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