MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210681716 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v22i4.5437

An Internet Articles Retrieval Agent Combined With Dynamic Associative Concept Maps to Implement Online Learning in an Artificial Intelligence Course

2022· article· en· W4210681716 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

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceThe InternetSearch engineControl (management)World Wide WebFilter (signal processing)Associative propertyMultimediaArtificial intelligenceInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online learning has been widely discussed in education research, and open educational resources have become an increasingly popular way to help learners acquire knowledge. However, these resources contain massive amounts of information, making it difficult for learners to identify Web articles that refer to computer science knowledge. This study developed an Internet articles retrieval agent combined with dynamic associative concept maps (DACMs). The system used text mining technology to analyze keywords to filter computer science articles. In previous research, concept maps were manually constructed; in this study, such maps can be automatically and dynamically generated in real time. In a case study of a fundamental course of artificial intelligence, this study designed two experiments to compare students’ learning behaviors while using this system and the Google search engine. The results of the first experiment showed that the experimental group searched for more knowledge articles on computer science using this agent, compared to the control group using the Google search engine. The learning performance of the experimental group was significantly better than that of the control group, while the cognitive load of the experimental group was significantly lower than that of the control group. Furthermore, the results of the second experiment showed that the learning progress of students using the agent was significantly greater than that of students who used the Google search engine. This illustrates that the agent effectively filtered computer science articles, and DACMs helped students gain a deeper understanding of academic concepts and knowledge related to artificial intelligence.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.386 · 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