MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156095999 · doi:10.1109/13.925843

Development of an interactive CDROM-based tutorial for teaching MATLAB

2001· article· en· W2156095999 on OpenAlexaff
Brian L. F. Daku, Karolan Jeffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Education · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMATLABComputer scienceWindow (computing)SyntaxInterface (matter)MultimediaHuman–computer interactionSimulationEngineering drawingProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the development of an interactive computer-based tutorial for MATLAB. This tutorial has been developed for undergraduate or graduate students who have had little or no exposure to MATLAB. Students are guided through new concepts and syntax with useful aids such as audio, video and interactive exercises. The exercises, implemented in a specially designed exercise window, give the students an opportunity to use MATLAB to solve problems immediately after covering new concepts. The exercise window has a background interface to MATLAB and thus all commands entered in the window are executed by MATLAB. Hints, example solutions, multiple choice quizzes and test problems, requiring the use of proper MATLAB structure and syntax, add to the learning experience. This project was initially undertaken to investigate student response to alternate computer-based teaching methods. Thus student input has played an important part in the development of this tutorial. Subjective feedback from students, which is presented in the paper, indicate great promise for this alternate approach to teaching MATLAB.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.017

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on EducationSame topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207