MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341475035 · doi:10.7603/s40742-015-0001-6

Automatic and Semi-Automatic Test Generation for Introductory Linguistics Courses Using Natural Language Processing Resources and Text Corpora

2015· article· en· W2341475035 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueGSTF Journal on Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGrammarNatural language processingTest (biology)Identification (biology)Artificial intelligencePhrase structure rulesCorpus linguisticsComputational linguisticsApplied linguisticsLinguisticsNatural languageEnglish grammarSection (typography)PhraseGenerative grammar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes a collection of Natural Language Processing (NLP) modules which automatically generate exercises for introductory courses on structural linguistics and English grammar at a Canadian University. While there is a growing demand for electronic exercises, online testing tools, and self contained linguistics and grammar courses, the exercises and tests offered on companion websites for popular textbooks consist largely of multiple choice type questions. The modules create exercises to practice and test part-of-speech identification, morphological analysis of complex words, and the analysis of sentences into phrase structure trees. They are part of an infrastructure capable of delivering instructional material, exercises for for self assessment, and online testing tools for courses which either use blended instruction or are taught exclusively online. Modules which are work in progress will be briefly discussed in the final section of this paper.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGSTF Journal on EducationSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207