An Emotional Student Model for Game-Based Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students’ performance and motivation are influenced by their emotions. Game-based learning (GBL) environments comprise elements that facilitate learning and the creation of an emotional connection with students. GBL environments include Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs) to ensure personalized learning. ITSs reason about students’ needs and characteristics (student modeling) to provide suitable instruction (tutor modeling). The authors’ research is focused on the design and implementation of an emotional student model for GBL environments based on the Control-Value Theory of achievement emotions by Pekrun et al. (2007). The model reasons about answers to questions in game dialogues and contextual variables related to student behavior acquired through students’ interaction with PlayPhysics. The authors’ model is implemented using Dynamic Bayesian Networks (DBNs), which are derived using Probabilistic Relational Models (PRMs), machine learning techniques, and statistical methods. This work compares an earlier approach that uses Multinomial Logistic Regression (MLR) and cross-tabulation for learning the structure and conditional probability tables with an approach that employs Necessary Path Condition and Expectation Maximization algorithms. Results showed that the latter approach is more effective at classifying the control of outcome-prospective emotions. Future work will focus on applying this approach to classification of activity and outcome-retrospective emotions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".