Design of a Smart Teaching Management Platform Integrating Artificial Intelligence Technology under the Perspective of Resource Sharing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the development of sharing economy, educational resource sharing has become the focus of experts and scholars to explore and practice.In this paper, from the perspective of resource sharing, a smart teaching management platform is successfully designed by combining arti icial intelligence technology.This research adopts YOLOv5s algorithm for face recognition and prediction in the design process, which is convenient for teaching management.Relying on the Hadoop cloud resource base, the teaching resource sharing database is designed, and the system computing logic is optimized by the distributed ile system HDFS.It is analyzed that the maximum number of interactions per second of the intelligent teaching management platform designed in this paper can reach 207, and the maximum interaction response time is about 68ms, and the load performance is completely better than that of the traditional teaching resource platform.At the same time, the intelligent teaching management platform can accommodate nearly 300 people to study online at the same time, which is far more than the previous mode of learning in the classroom.With the use of the intelligent platform, the development of "Internet + education" is greatly promoted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".