MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416050620 · doi:10.61931/2224-9028.1639

KADYSNET: A NOVEL APPROACH TO DYSLEXIA PREDICTION IN CHILDREN: COMBINING HANDWRITTEN TEXT RECOGNITION WITH A HYBRID CNN-BILSTM-CTC MODEL AND PERSONALIZED LEARNING STRATEGIES

2025· article· en· W4416050620 on OpenAlexaff
Shailesh Patil, Ravindra Sadashivrao Apare, Ravindra Honaji Borhade, Parikshit N. Mahalle

Bibliographic record

VenueASEAN Journal on Science and Technology for Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWriting and Handwriting Education
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalizationDyslexiaHandwritingSentenceDropout (neural networks)Focus (optics)ParagraphKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces a novel approach for early dyslexia detection in children through automated handwriting analysis, integrating a hybrid CNN-BiLSTM-CTC architecture with personalized learning strategies. Our method combines a custom CNN-BiLSTM-CTC model with tailored educational interventions to support dyslexic learners. We analyzed children's handwritten text images in English, collected from specially designed tests involving word rewriting, sentence reconstruction, and paragraph composition, particularly challenging tasks for dyslexic individuals. Notably, our CNN-BiLSTM-CTC model achieved the best result with an accuracy of 97.67%, outperforming other architectures. Compared to pre-trained models like EfficientNetB7, DenseNet121, and MobileNetV2, our custom CNN-BiLSTM-CTC model demonstrated superior performance. Key contributions include the development of a novel CNN-BiLSTM-CTC architecture for handwriting analysis and the integration of personalized learning strategies to enhance educational outcomes. By facilitating earlier and more accurate detection, this approach can significantly improve educational support for children at risk of dyslexia. Future research will focus on expanding the dataset and conducting longitudinal studies to assess the long-term impact. Customization and CNN-BiLSTM hybridization together enhance performance by capturing subtle handwriting variations and integrating spatial with sequential learning.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueASEAN Journal on Science and Technology for DevelopmentSame topicWriting and Handwriting EducationFrench-language works237,207