MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394794784 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2024.070123

Research on the Hybrid Teaching Mode of Mechanical Fundamentals in the Context of Artificial Intelligence

2024· article· en· W4394794784 on OpenAlex
Zifeng Liu, Siyu Lu, Jiaxin Luo

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

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIdeological and Political Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Xinjiang Province
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Mode (computer interface)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to explore the innovation and application of mechanical foundation teaching mode in the context of artificial intelligence, and to improve students' learning efficiency and understanding ability through a hybrid teaching mode, which combines online and offline teaching methods. In the experiment, by comparing and analyzing the differences between traditional teaching mode and blended teaching mode in student learning effectiveness, the superiority of blended teaching mode in mechanical foundation courses was obtained. At the same time, this study also pointed out the problems and solutions in the implementation of blended learning mode, providing strong theoretical support and practical guidance for the optimization of future teaching modes. In the experimental stage, we explored the effectiveness of Long Short Term Memory (LSTM), Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) and Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) in educational technology applications through four experiments. In the benchmark performance evaluation experiment, the accuracy based on the LSTM model was 75%, the recall was 80%, and the F1 score was 77%. In the second learning path recommendation effectiveness evaluation experiment, the LSTM model improved the average score of students by 15 points in recommending learning paths. In the evaluation experiment of improving learning motivation and participation, the learning motivation score based on the LSTM model was 90 points, and the participation score was 92 points. From the above experimental data conclusions, it can be seen that the LSTM model has great potential in educational technology applications, especially in designing personalized learning paths, improving learning motivation and engagement, and promoting long-term learning outcomes.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.232 · 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