MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177877513 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.14830

DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE SCALE STEM PROBLEM DATABASES FOR STUDENT LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS

2021· article· en· W3177877513 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jeffrey A. Davis, Shelley Lorimer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Assessment
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDatabaseSentenceVariety (cybernetics)Scale (ratio)Extension (predicate logic)Open sourceArtificial intelligenceSoftwareProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problem databases in STEM courses are used in tools for the development of student learning andfinal assessment. In addition, large problem databases are used to develop models for automatic assessment and feedback of students’ work. However, the availability of large, open source, problem databases for specificcourses is limited, and in-house development of a wide variety of problems can take years. In this paper, theframework for a problem database in STEM courses was created using semantic analysis of sentence structure and composition. Problem statements were analyzed to determine the key grammatical constructs that are used in commonly posed problems. Based on this analysis, software was developed to create large problemdatabases which allow for simple extension to other courses. Using a first-year mechanics course this softwarewas populated with a few generalized question and sentence structures to create a large problem database.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicEducational Technology and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207