MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734595044 · doi:10.1145/3099023.3099114

Recommender Systems for Personalized Gamification

2017· article· en· W2734595044 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceRecommender systemVariety (cybernetics)Context (archaeology)Human–computer interactionData scienceWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gamification has been used in a variety of application domains to promote behaviour change. Nevertheless, the mechanisms behind it are still not fully understood. Recent empirical results have shown that personalized approaches can potentially achieve better results than generic approaches. However, we still lack a general framework for building personalized gameful applications. To address this gap, we present a novel general framework for personalized gameful applications using recommender systems (i.e., software tools and technologies to recommend suggestions to users that they might enjoy). This framework contributes to understanding and building effective persuasive and gameful applications by describing the different building blocks of a recommender system (users, items, and transactions) in a personalized gamification context.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Quick stats

Citations81
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207