MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231441671 · doi:10.4018/jcit.2005010108

Development of KABISA

2005· article· en· W4231441671 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cases on Information Technology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTUTORComputer scienceValue (mathematics)ComputationDevelopment (topology)Mathematics educationLogical conjunctionSoftware engineeringProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KABISA is a computer-based program for training in diagnostic problems in (sub-) tropical regions. It challenges the individual student with a randomly generated case, for which he should try to find the diagnosis, asking questions, performing a physical examination, and ordering tests. The built-in tutor follows the student’s input with complex logical algorithms and mathematical computations, gives comments and support, and accepts the final diagnosis if sufficient evidence has been built up. Several problems arose with the development. In the first place, the evolution in the teaching of clinical logic is always ahead of the program, so regular updating of the computer logic is necessary. Secondly, the choice of MS Access as computer language has provoked problems of stability, especially the installation of an MS Access runtime. Thirdly, and most importantly, scholars want proof of the added value of computer programs over classical teaching. Moreover, the concept of a pedagogical “game” is often regarded as childish. Finally, the planning and financing of an “open-ended” pedagogical project is questioned by deciders, as is the case with all operational research.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · 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