MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244664043 · doi:10.34105/j.kmel.2010.02.027

The dynamics of interactivity modeling for e-learning

2010· article· en· W4244664043 on OpenAlexaff
Chima Adiele, Ezeamaka D. Nwanze

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Management & E-Learning An International Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteractivityComputer scienceContext (archaeology)The InternetMultimediaVocabularyE learningExperiential learningKnowledge managementMathematics educationWorld Wide WebPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in information and communication technologies have given impetus to e-learning as choice educational environment for million of learners. E-learning involves the use of Internet technology to provide education where the instructor and students operate without geographical boundaries. Despite positive strides made in e-learning, the drop out rate of students remains high. Most educators argue that interactivity of learners is central to the success of e-learning initiatives. Accordingly, we present an interactivity model to dynamically measure interactivity in the context of e-learning. The model leverages a common term vocabulary and Chebyshev's inequalities to objectively measure the contributions of participants in a group work. We evaluate the performance of our model using extensive simulation studies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Management & E-Learning An International JournalSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207