MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409795037 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-378

Research on Intelligent Learning Path Planning and Recommendation Algorithm in OMO Teaching Mode Based on Artificial Intelligence Grand Modeling

2025· article· en· W4409795037 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEducation Department of Jiangxi Province
KeywordsMode (computer interface)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePath (computing)Machine learningAlgorithmHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OMO teaching mode based on artificial intelligence big model is one of the important future research directions and application landing forms in the future education field.The learning path recommendation algorithm based on big language model is constructed by integrating Transformer architecture, neural network architecture and self-attention mechanism.Combining it with the course knowledge graph, it links the learners with the knowledge system and visualizes the results of the intelligently planned learning path.The study shows that compared with several other algorithms, the personalized learning path recommendation algorithm based on AI big model has better convergence speed and stability.The optimal solution for learning path planning is found after only about 90 iterations.Taking "Chemical Process and Control Simulation" as the target course, the method in this paper gives the learning path and course.Through the questionnaire survey, the mean value of the four dimensions of pre-class pre-study, classroom exploration, post-class enhancement, and learning satisfaction is more than 3 points, which indicates that the OMO model and the teaching model of the artificial intelligence big model have a better experience.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.323 · 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