MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332622947 · doi:10.1109/csicsse.2015.7369246

Design practices for multimodal affective mathematical learning

2015· article· en· W2332622947 on OpenAlexafffund
Reza GhasemAghaei, Ali Arya, Robert Biddle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIndustry Canada
KeywordsModalitiesDistractionComputer scienceAffect (linguistics)Multimodal learningHuman–computer interactionAffective computingMultimodal interactionCognitionEquivalence (formal languages)Multimodal therapyFocus (optics)Cognitive psychologyArtificial intelligencePsychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we focus on interaction design for multimodal software in affective education, and provide a case study of our MADE (Multimodal Affect for Design and Evaluation) framework. We are considering the sensory modalities, affective and cognitive strategies and trying to solve mathematical learning difficulties such as lack of attention, distraction, stress or disabilities. Using a multimodal affective learning system will increase the encouragement in learning, and will help students develop grounded understanding of proportional equivalence e.g. 1/3 = 2/6.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.284
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207