MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991604860 · doi:10.3390/app9235084

PACA-ITS: A Multi-Agent System for Intelligent Virtual Laboratory Courses

2019· article· en· W2991604860 on OpenAlexaff
Saima Munawar, Saba Khalil Toor, Muhammad Aslam, Esma Aı̈meur

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJavaJADE (particle detector)Software engineeringMulti-agent systemIntelligent agentOntologyArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an intensive design leading to the implementation of an intelligent lab companion (ILC) agent for an intelligent virtual laboratory (IVL) platform. An IVL enables virtual labs (VL) to be used as online research laboratories, thereby facilitating and improving the analytical skills of students using agent technology. A multi-agent system enhances the capability of the learning system and solves students’ problems automatically. To ensure an exhaustive Agent Unified Modeling Language (AUML) design, identification of the agents’ types and responsibilities on well-organized AUML strategies is carried out. This work also traces the design challenge of IVL modeling and the ILC agent functionality of six basic agents: the practical coaching agent (PCA), practical dispatcher agent (PDA), practical interaction and coordination agent (PICA), practical expert agent (PEA), practical knowledge management agent (PKMA), and practical inspection agent (PIA). Furthermore, this modeling technique is compatible with ontology mapping based on an enabling technology using the Java Agent Development Framework (JADE), Cognitive Tutor Authoring Tools (CTAT), and Protégé platform integration. The potential Java Expert System Shell (Jess) programming implements the cognitive model algorithm criteria that are applied to measure progress through the CTAT for C++ programming concept task on IVL and successfully deployed on the TutorShop web server for evaluation. The results are estimated through the learning curve to assess the preceding knowledge, error rate, and performance profiler to engage cognitive Jess agent efficiency as well as practicable and active decisions to improve student 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207