MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3049133404 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2020.41011

An Empirical Analysis of Data-driven Intelligent Teaching Based on Cloud Class Platform

2020· article· en· W3049133404 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinhong Liu, Yuan Feng, Chunxia Wu, Yaqin Lu, Di Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceProcess (computing)Class (philosophy)Relevance (law)VisualizationQuality (philosophy)Data visualizationData scienceMultimediaMathematics educationData miningArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, with the vigorous development of education platform, it is necessary to evaluate the effect of teaching process based on the data on the platform, but the evaluation method is relatively simple, lacking the data-driven evaluation based on the learning process. In order to achieve data-driven learning evaluation and improve teaching efficiency, the cloud class platform is used to collect the data of learners' learning process and the analysis and research of data visualization are carried out based on the platform. First, the students are divided into four categories by harmonic curve and cluster analysis. Second, the advantages and disadvantages of all kinds of students are pointed out by correspondence analysis. These results can guide teachers to use education data to mine the relevance between achievements and knowledge points, and help teachers to implement the talent training strategy of individualized teaching, improve teaching quality, provide timely feedback and control for students' learning, facilitate students' independent learning and improve learning effect.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207