MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030361007 · doi:10.1145/3334480.3382789

Towards Progress Assessment for Adaptive Hints in Educational Virtual Reality Games

2020· article· en· W3030361007 on OpenAlexaff
Tobias Drey, Pascal Jansen, Fabian Fischbach, Julian Frommel, Enrico Rukzio

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Educational gameVirtual realityImmersion (mathematics)MultimediaHuman–computer interactionEmbodied cognitionAdaptive learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One strength of educational games is their adaptivity to the individual learning progress. Methods to assess progress during gameplay are limited, especially in virtual reality (VR) settings, which show great potential for educational games because of their high immersion. We propose the concept of adaptive hints using progress assessment based on player behavior tracked through a VR-system's tracking capabilities. We implemented Social Engineer, a VR-based educational game teaching basic knowledge about social engineering (SE). In two user studies, we will evaluate the performance of the progress assessment and the effects of the intervention through adaptive hints on the players' experience and learning effects. This research can potentially benefit researchers and practitioners, who want to assess progress in educational games and leverage the real-time assessment for adaptive hint systems with the potential of improved player experience and learning outcomes.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.334 · 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
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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207