MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407733880 · doi:10.1007/s11528-025-01060-6

Venturing into the Unknown: Critical Insights into Grey Areas and Pioneering Future Directions in Educational Generative AI Research

2025· article· en· W4407733880 on OpenAlexaff
Junhong Xiao, Aras Bozkurt, Mark Nichols, Angelica Pazurek, Christian M. Stracke, John Y. H. Bai, Robert Farrow, Dorothy Mulligan, Chrissi Nerantzi, Ramesh C. Sharma, Lenandlar Singh, Isak Froumin, Andrew Swindell, Sarah Honeychurch, Melissa Bond, Jon Dron, Stephanie Moore, Jing Leng, Patricia J. Slagter van Tryon, Manuel B. Garcia, Evgeniy Terentev, Ahmed Tlili, Thomas K. F. Chiu, Charles B. Hodges, Petar Jandrić, Alexander M. Sidorkin, Helen Crompton, Stefan Hrastinski, Apostolos Koutropoulos, Mutlu Cukurova, Peter Shea, Steven Watson, Kai Zhang, Kyungmee Lee, Eamon Costello, Mike Sharples, Anton Vorochkov, Bryan Alexander, Maha Bali, Robert L. Moore, Olaf Zawacki‐Richter, Tutaleni I. Asino, Henk Huijser, Chanjin Zheng, Sunagül Sani-Bozkurt, Josep M. Duart, Chryssa Themelis

Bibliographic record

VenueTechTrends · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenerative grammarEducational technologySociologyEngineering ethicsKnowledge managementManagement scienceMathematics educationComputer sciencePedagogyEngineeringPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.045
Scholarly communication0.0170.034
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTechTrendsSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207