Teaching Modelling Literacy: An Artificial Intelligence Approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it