MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051447463 · doi:10.1145/2567574.2567633

Learning analytics and machine learning

2014· article· en· W2051447463 on OpenAlexaff
Dragan Gašević, Carolyn Penstein Rosé, George Siemens, Annika Wolff, Zdeněk Zdráhal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearning analyticsComputer scienceAnalyticsData scienceField (mathematics)Software analyticsCultural analyticsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningSemantic analytics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning analytics (LA) as a field remains in its infancy. Many of the techniques now prominent from practitioners have been drawn from various fields, including HCI, statistics, computer science, and learning sciences. In order for LA to grow and advance as a discipline, two significant challenges must be met: 1) development of analytics methods and techniques that are native to the LA discipline, and 2) practitioners in LA to develop algorithms and models that reflect the social and computational dimensions of analytics. This workshop introduces researchers in learning analytics to machine learning (ML) and the opportunities that ML can provide in building next generation analysis models.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207