MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409793704 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-191

Exploration on the Development of Physical Education Teaching Integration Mode in Colleges and Universities Based on Artificial Intelligence

2025· article· en· W4409793704 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicE-commerce and Technology Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationMode (computer interface)PsychologyEngineeringEngineering managementComputer scienceEngineering ethicsHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arti icial intelligence plays an increasingly important role in contemporary education, and it provides new possibilities for the innovation of physical education teaching mode.This paper constructs a college sports teaching integration model based on arti icial intelligence from ive aspects: educators, learners, teaching methods, educational resources and teaching feedback and evaluation.It focuses on designing a precise teaching model PLRSM based on personalized learning resource recommendation by combining learner portrait and learning resource portrait, and takes the recommendation of physical education teaching resources for physical education students as a case study to verify the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.The results show that compared with the traditional baseline algorithm, the PLRSM algorithm still maintains a better recommendation performance when the data set co-occurrence matrix is extremely sparse, and its correct rate of physical education teaching resources recommendation is 0.80.In addition, compared with the traditional teaching model, the AIbased college physical education teaching fusion model can signi icantly improve the learners' knowledge of physical education subject and course teaching, and its post-test score is higher than the pre-test score 11.525 to 15.436 points.The study provides theoretical support and practical guidance for the application of arti icial intelligence in physical education teaching, and provides a useful reference for promoting the innovation of physical education teaching mode.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 topicE-commerce and Technology InnovationsFrench-language works237,207