MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2847576947 · doi:10.1177/2042753018785180

E-learning, M-learning and D-learning: Conceptual definition and comparative analysis

2018· article· en· W2847576947 on OpenAlexaff
Sujit Kumar Basak, Marguerite Wotto, Paul Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueE-Learning and Digital Media · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningLearning sciencesEducational technologyActive learning (machine learning)Computer scienceTerminologyCooperative learningSynchronous learningDigital learningM-learningAlgorithmic learning theoryArtificial intelligenceKnowledge managementPsychologyMathematics educationMobile deviceTeaching methodMultimediaWorld Wide WebLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 21st century, the information and communication technology explosion increases the uses of digital devices for many purposes in the world of work and in formal and non-formal education. This study analyzes existing literature on the basis of the definition of the concepts, terminology used, differences, fundamental perspectives, benefits, disadvantages, and finally the similarities and differences of the e-learning (electronic learning), m-learning (mobile learning), and d-learning (digital learning). It reveals that e-learning and m-learning are subsets of d-learning. On the other hand, some learning tools could be considered as m-learning as well as e-learning.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0180.032
Science and technology studies0.0020.013
Scholarly communication0.0090.015
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations655
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-Learning and Digital MediaSame topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207