MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113773517 · doi:10.7202/031995ar

Modalités et scénarios d’interaction dans des hypermédias d’apprentissage

2007· article· fr· W2113773517 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article propose de distinguer deux niveaux dans la conception d'un outil pédagogique multimédia interactif: celui des modalités d'interaction et celui du scénario d'interaction. Les modalités d'interaction concernent les aspects concrets et matériels de l'interaction de l'utilisateur avec la machine; a priori, rien de spécifique ici au domaine des apprentissages. Le scénario d'interaction concerne les aspects pédagogiques de l'interaction de l'apprenant avec un contenu d'enseignement; a priori, rien de spécifique ici au support utilisé. Le texte illustre la distinction entre ces niveaux en montrant d'abord, à partir d'éléments de la documentation empirique, les effets que peuvent avoir des options prises à chaque niveau sur l'activité de l'utilisateur-apprenant; puis, à partir de leur expérience de concepteurs de cédéroms, les auteurs apportent des exemples de solutions de conception.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.517
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.071 · 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