MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081490919 · doi:10.1109/acii.2013.94

Student Emotions with an Edu-game: A Detailed Analysis

2013· article· en· W2081490919 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
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Matching (statistics)Interval (graph theory)Emotion classificationReliability (semiconductor)PsychologyComputer scienceAffective computingSocial psychologyCognitive psychologyMathematics educationArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of a study that explored the emotions experienced by students during interaction with an educational game for math (Heroes of Math Island). Starting from emotion frameworks in affective computing and education, we considered a larger set of emotions than in related research. For emotion labeling, we employed a standard method that relies on trained judges to report emotions over 20-second intervals. However, we asked judges to report all observed emotions in each interval, as opposed to only choosing one, as is standard practice. This variation allows us to discuss the appropriateness of this interval for emotion labeling. We present a detailed analysis of inter-coder reliability, both aggregated and over individual students, that considers not only the matching by judges over emotion type, but also the number of emotions detected.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · 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