MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987628936 · doi:10.18178/ijiet.2019.9.10.1287

Enhancing the Learning Experience Using Real-Time Cognitive Evaluation

2019· article· en· W2987628936 on OpenAlexafffund
Maher Chaouachi, Imène Jraidi, Susanne P. Lajoie, Claude Frasson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information and Education Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitionCognitive psychologyPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing evidence that learners' affective and cognitive states play a key role in the learning process.This suggests that systems which are able to detect these states can dynamically use adapted strategies to increase the pace of the learners' skill acquisition and improve their learning experience.In this work, we present a novel approach for automatically adapting the learning strategy in real-time according to the learner's detected mental state.The main goal of the approach is to maintain the learner in a positive state during a lesson by adaptively selecting the best interaction strategy between either using problem solving or worked examples.Two mental indexes, namely, cognitive load and mental engagement were extracted from electroencephalogram (EEG) signals, and used to adapt the system's interaction.The cognitive load index was developped by training and validating a prediction model on various types of memory and logical tasks.The engagement index was directly computed from the EEG signal frequency bands.An experiment with 14 learners was performed in order to evaluate this approach.The obtained results showed that using the learner's mental state to adapt the system's interaction has a positive impact on the learning outcomes, the learning experience and the learners' reported emotional states.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information and Education TechnologySame topicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningFrench-language works237,207