Predicting reading comprehension scores from eye movements using artificial neural networks and fuzzy output error
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predicting reading comprehension from eye gaze data is a difficult task. We investigate the use of artificial neural networks(ANNs) to predict reading comprehension scores from eye gaze collected from participants who read and completed an onlinetutorial in our lab. Problems such as large feature sets and small highly imbalanced data sets compound to make this task evenmore complex. We propose using fuzzy output error (FOE) as an alternative performance function to mean square error (MSE)for training feed-forward neural networks to overcome these problems. We show that the use of FOE as the performance functionfor training ANNs provides significantly better classification of eye movements to reading comprehension scores. ANNs withthree hidden layers of neurons gave the best classification results especially when FOE is used as the performance functionfor training. In these cases we found up to 50% reduction in misclassification rates compared to using MSE. We found thatANNs give optimal classification results in comparison to other classification techniques. When FOE is used as the performancefunction for training the ANNs the misclassification rates are halved compared to the other techniques. Cluster analysis wasperformed on one of the more complex data sets. Interesting reading behaviour properties were found within the data set.The intended use of this research is in the design of adaptive online learning environments that use eye gaze to predict usercomprehension from reading behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".