MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407706881 · doi:10.5539/hes.v15n2p1

A Bibliometric Analysis of Artificial Intelligence for Multimedia in Education by Dimensions AI

2025· article· en· W4407706881 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Potsirin Limpinan, Ampawan Yindeemak, Rungfa Pasmala, Manop Nammanee, Thada Jantakoon

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducation and Learning Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationMultimediaComputer scienceMathematics educationComputer-Assisted InstructionTrend analysisStatistical analysisPsychologyStatisticsMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of Artificial Intelligence (AI) research for Multimedia in Education from 2020 to 2024. Using the Dimensions AI database, VOSviewer software and Scimago Graphica, we examined 45 publications to identify key trends, influential contributors, and emerging directions in this rapidly evolving field. The analysis reveals a significant publication surge from 2020 to 2021, followed by stabilization in subsequent years. China is the dominant contributor, with 19 publications and 214 citations, highlighting its leadership in AI and educational technology research. Co-authorship network analysis shows a tightly interconnected research community lacking distinct clusters. The most cited papers focus on student engagement and specific AI applications in education, indicating the field's emphasis on practical implementations. Keyword analysis reveals a consistent focus on core concepts such as artificial intelligence, education, technology, and learning, with a recent shift towards more user-centered research. The study also identifies challenges in implementing AI for multimedia in education, including data privacy concerns, ethical considerations, and the need for educator training. These findings provide valuable insights for researchers, educators, and policymakers, highlighting the need to balance technological advancements with pedagogical needs and ethical considerations. Future research directions include investigating the long-term impact of AI-enhanced multimedia education, developing ethical frameworks, conducting cross-cultural studies, and enhancing AI's capability to provide personalized learning experiences through multimedia content.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.2020.285
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicEducation and Learning InterventionsCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207