MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409787561 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-314

Constructing an Equilibrium Optimization Model of Teaching Strategies between English Teachers and Students Based on Game Theory

2025· article· en· W4409787561 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationGame theoryComputer scienceSociologyMathematical economicsPsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teachers and students will form a variety of dependent behaviors and interactions centered on teaching activities in the teaching process, thus, the teaching process can be regarded as a typical game process.This paper invokes game theory, takes teacher-student behavioral interaction as the research object, constructs a game model of teacher-student behavior in the process of English teaching, and proposes a teaching optimization strategy for English flipped classroom.At the same time, numerical simulation of the teacher-student game model is carried out to explore the dynamic game equilibrium under the cooperative behavior of teachers and students.The simulation results show that in the teacher-student game network, the strategy choices of teachers and students change over time, and different benefit-loss parameter , additional gain parameter 0 , and cost-saving parameter have a greater impact on the replication of the strategy choice behaviors of the game parties.In addition, the increase of the parameters of the gain PT obtained by the instructor's conscientious instruction, the gain PS obtained by the student's conscientious learning, and the loss KS of the punishment that the student receives for not learning conscientiously are conducive to the promotion of the instructor and the student's strategy evolution towards cooperation (conscientious instruction, conscientious learning), while the increase of the instructional cost CT of the instructor's conscientious instruction and the learning cost CT paid by the student's conscientious learning are not conducive to the promotion of the two parties' cooperation,.And when the proportion of instructors and students initially choosing cooperation is larger, the likelihood of both parties evolving toward cooperation is greater.This paper provides theoretical support for the optimization of English teaching process.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207