MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404611754 · doi:10.1590/1980-4415v38a240104

A study of the role of gesture in the processing of numbers and vectors

2024· article· en· W4404611754 on OpenAlexaff
Omid Khatin‐Zadeh, Zahra Eskandari, Babak Yazdani‐Fazlabadi

Bibliographic record

VenueBolema Boletim de Educação Matemática · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureBasis (linear algebra)Embodied cognitionEuclidean vectorComputer scienceGroup (periodic table)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsComputer visionGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, we investigated the embodied nature of vector as one of the fundamental concepts in mathematics. Our aim was to examine the role of gesture in finding directions of vectors and magnitudes of vectors on the basis of coordinates of initial points and end points of vectors. In Experiment 1, participants were asked to find directions of vectors on the basis of coordinates of initial points and end points of the vectors. While participants of one group were allowed to gesture, participants of another group were prohibited from gesturing. In Experiment 2, participants were asked to find directions and relative magnitudes of x-coordinates and y-coordinates of vectors on the basis of coordinates of initial points and end points of the vectors. In both experiments, participants of gesture-allowed group had a better performance in answering the questions. Specifically, participants performed better in finding the directions of those vectors which had a left-down direction. Based on these results, it can be concluded that the process of finding the direction and magnitude of a vector on the basis of its initial and end points is mainly embodied as a combination of leftward and downward movements (left-down direction).

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBolema Boletim de Educação MatemáticaSame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207