MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391547320 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2024.070104

Development of Digital English Education in the Context of Artificial Intelligence

2024· article· en· W4391547320 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wei Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJiangsu Provincial Department of Education
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital English education has entered a new era before the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI). The adoption of AI teaching into China's teaching reform has become inevitable. AI has effectively integrated and shared educational resources in China. This paper aimed to study how to analyze and research the development of digital English education based on AI. At the same time, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to evaluate AI's promotion of digital English education. After the questionnaire survey was distributed to 500 students, this paper analyzed 488 valid questionnaires. Among the tendencies in English education, 85.04% of students chose to use multimedia equipment to assist teaching. It can be seen that multimedia assisted instruction has become the first choice for most students. In addition, a questionnaire survey was conducted among teachers of English majors. Among 200 valid questionnaires, 59.00% of teachers chose to show their learning content for the purpose of using multimedia materials. It can be seen from this that most of the teachers in the school are still at the stage of displaying the content. To sum up, in order to enable students to better accept digital teaching, their initiative and enthusiasm to better use and manage digital resources and other related information technologies and carry out independent and effective learning in a digital environment has been enhanced, so that they can better use and manage digital resources and other related information technologies to understand their own learning in a digital environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.382
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence PracticeSame topicEducational Innovations and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207