MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734518920 · doi:10.1609/aimag.v34i3.2483

Student Modeling: Supporting Personalized Instruction, from Problem Solving to Exploratory Open‐Ended Activities

2013· article· en· W2734518920 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAI Magazine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalizationVariety (cybernetics)Computer scienceField (mathematics)Personalized learningCoachingComponent (thermodynamics)Intelligent tutoring systemHuman–computer interactionCore (optical fiber)MultimediaMathematics educationArtificial intelligenceTeaching methodWorld Wide WebCooperative learningOpen learningPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs) has successfully delivered techniques and applications to provide personalized coaching and feedback for problem solving in a variety of domains. The core of this personalized instruction is a student model: the ITS component in charge of assessing student traits and states relevant to tailor the tutorial interaction to specific student needs during problem solving. There are however, other educational activities that can help learners acquire the target skills and abilities at different stages of learning including, among others, exploring interactive simulations and playing educational games. This article describes research on creating student models that support personalization for these novel types of interactions, their unique challenges, and how AI and machine learning can help.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.255 · 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