MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136227546 · doi:10.5539/cis.v14n2p50

The Impact of Augmented Reality on E-learning Systems in Saudi Arabia Universities

2021· article· en· W3136227546 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented realityAsideComputer scienceCurriculumContext (archaeology)Principal (computer security)Human–computer interactionPedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper was to investigate the impact of Augmented Reality on e-learning systems at colleges in Saudi Arabia. In this research, Augmented Reality could reenact real environment by computerized overlays that learners can interact with and without much of a stretch access. What is more, Augmented Reality helps consumers to explore alternative learning avenues around learning content. Setting that aside, there has not been sufficiently thorough research on the evaluation of Augmented Reality in the context of teaching. The primary objective of this research is to examine possible standard factors identified with the successful use of unparalleled scale. This prototype highlights the essential factors that affect the implementation of AR via the quantitative approach to Augmented Reality knowledge assortment and evaluation. The research finds the principal coefficients for the attainment of Augmented Reality: IT infrastructure, IT agility, interaction stability, self-learning ability, curriculum, student background, ease of use and Usefulness. The after-effects of this analysis includes useful debates to create up a perfect fate of Augmented Reality and help handle the enhancement of instruction and e-learning with competitive societies and frameworks in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as well as other countries.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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