MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400406228 · doi:10.1007/s40593-024-00415-z

Optimization of Information Retrieval Systems for Learning Contexts

2024· article· en· W4400406228 on OpenAlexaff
Jaurès Styve Kameni Homte, Bernabé Batchakui, Roger Nkambou

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEducational technologyMultimediaInformation retrievalMathematics educationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of Sub-Saharan African countries are facing a very negative teacher-learner ratio: one teacher for over 120 learners. In order to support the learner training, we propose optimizing search engines for learning contexts, to enable learners to take optimal advantage of the vast reservoir of Open Educational Resources (OER) available on the Internet. It bears noting that search engines serve as the primary means of accessing OER on the Internet. Indeed, search engines often present a large volume of content that is sometimes unsuited for learning contexts, potentially resulting in cognitive overload and a considerable loss of time for learners and teachers seeking appropriate resources among so many options. To this end, this work proposes an additional layer for Information Retrieval Systems (IRS) whose architecture features include: a match to the Bloom’s Taxonomy of the query, a pedagogical filter, and an informative presentation of results. The implementation of a system underpinning this model utilizes Google APIs. It should be noted that, search results are re-ranked after classifying the user query and initial results according to Bloom's taxonomy, performed through machine learning-based Natural Language Processing (NLP). In addition, an integrated intelligent filter removes irrelevant search results for learning purposes. On the Human-Machine Interaction (HMI) side, this layer relies on an educational content ontology to generate results that are more informative and semantically meaningful. An empirical evaluation of the system involving 84 students using a comparative questionnaire indicates the additional layer is favorable for educational use.

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)0.011
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence in EducationSame topicOpen Education and E-LearningFrench-language works237,207