MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989657589 · doi:10.1109/models-c.2019.00108

Teaching Modelling Literacy: An Artificial Intelligence Approach

2019· article· en· W2989657589 on OpenAlexaff
Rijul Saini, Gunter Mussbacher, Jin Guo, Joerg Kienzle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAbstractionRotation formalisms in three dimensionsProvisioningArtificial intelligenceSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Model-Driven Engineering (MDE), models are used to build and analyze complex systems. In the last decades, different modelling formalisms have been proposed for supporting software development. However, their adoption and practice strongly rely on mastering essential modelling skills to develop a complete and coherent model-based system. Moreover, it is often difficult for novice modellers to get direct and timely feedback and recommendations on their modelling strategies and decisions, particularly in large classroom settings which hinders their learning. Certainly, there is an opportunity to apply Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques to an MDE learning environment to empower the provisioning of automated and intelligent modelling advocacy. In this paper, we propose a framework called ModBud (a modelling buddy) to educate novice modellers about the art of abstraction. ModBud uses natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) to create modelling bots with the aim of improving the modelling skills of novice modellers and assisting other practitioners, too. These bots could be used to support teaching with automatic creation or grading of models and enhance learning beyond the traditional classroom-based MDE education with timely feedback and personalized tutoring. Research challenges for the proposed framework are discussed and a research roadmap is presented.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207