MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060429088 · doi:10.1080/0958822042000334235

A New KE-Free Online ICALL System Featuring Error Contingent Feedback

2004· article· en· W2060429088 on OpenAlexaff
Naoyuki Tokuda, Liang Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Assisted Language Learning · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceError analysisError detection and correctionMultimediaMathematics educationPsychologyMathematicsAlgorithmApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a first step towards implementing a human language teacher, we have developed a new template-based on-line ICALL (intelligent computer assisted language learning) system capable of automatically diagnosing learners' free-format translated inputs and returning error contingent feedback. The system architecture we have adopted allows language teachers to build their own expertise into the system without the help of KEs (knowledge engineers), thus alleviating the long-standing KE bottlenecks associated with conventional expert-systems-based ITS (intelligent tutoring system) or ICALL (Murray, 1999). The core of the system comprises a unique FSA (finite state automaton)-based template knowledge base system, a robust and global HCS (heaviest common sequence)-based diagnostic engine, a POST(part-of speech-tagged) parser and related learners' model as well as an easy-to-use VTAT (visual template authoring tool). To simplify the task of authoring often quite complex template patterns, we have developed two sets of simpler rules; the first group of rules allows language teachers to manipulate complex sentence patterns with ease by constructing a template-template representation from which numerous separate templates can be extracted. The second group of buggy rules can be used to automatically generate syntactic bugs for learners by replacing part of the correct syntactic rules with plausible buggy rules. Using participants' responses extracted into the system templates, we present some convincing experimental verifications that the diagnostic engine is capable of providing error-contingent feedback and diagnosis applicable to a wide range of learners with differing educational backgrounds.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.008

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Assisted Language LearningSame topicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningFrench-language works237,207