MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953825731 · doi:10.5539/ass.v15n7p153

Mind Maps Aid EFL Students’ Vocabulary Building

2019· article· en· W2953825731 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnglish Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemorizationVocabularyRecallPsychologyMind mapMathematics educationLearning to learnCognitive psychologyComputer sciencePedagogyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mind mapping is a way to facilitate access to knowledge and retrieval by visual evidence such as pictures, arrows and colors. Young students need one place to register mind maps and the possibility of retrieving their memory. Through this study, the researcher found that the elementary student assistant on the creation of personal, bright and interesting using mind maps can alleviate the difficulties of recall and memorization of vocabulary for a longer period of time. On the other hand, teaching and learning through the mapping of the mind is a fun and entertaining way as it helps to motivate students to study new things and seek to learn and encourage learners to use new vocabulary habitually and increase the desire of students to know more. In addition, drawing skills is one of the easiest ways to manage, handle and develop vocabulary retention.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.269 · 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