MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387954531 · doi:10.22318/cscl2023.922487

Supporting Collective Inquiry in a Critical Action Game: A Role for Open AI Conversational Agents

2023· article· en· W4387954531 on OpenAlexaff
Kathy H. Zhou, Charlie Pullen, Jeff Holmes, James D. Slotta

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer-supported collaborative learning/˜The œComputer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDystopiaConversationContext (archaeology)Computer scienceAffordanceNarrativeCollective intelligenceHuman–computer interactionSociologyArtificial intelligenceCommunicationLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents Fall of Artica (FOA), a whole-class inquiry game set in a dystopian world that engages students to reflect critically and build media literacy through a collective inquiry about the dystopian context.This paper presents an application of cuttingedge AI technologies to create conversational agents using the OpenAI GPT3 large language model.These agents represent a new CSCL research affordance, allowing students to interact using natural language processing through spoken conversation with agents who are Non-Player Characters (NPC) that speak through a "portal into their dystopian world."The agents allow students to uncover the game narrative and receive clues and quests through natural conversations and inquiry.Here, we describe our initial application of these agents in an 11thgrade visual arts curriculum where students construct a collective visual representation of the dystopian context guided by conversational interactions with the NPCs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer-supported collaborative learning/˜The œComputer-Supported Collaborative Learning ConferenceSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207