Entry Jayal:2009:PLA from jeric.bib
Last update: Sun Oct 15 02:29:09 MDT 2017
Top |
Symbols |
Math |
A |
B |
C |
D |
E |
F |
G |
H |
I |
J |
K |
L |
M |
N |
O |
P |
Q |
R |
S |
T |
U |
V |
W |
Y |
Z
BibTeX entry
@Article{Jayal:2009:PLA,
author = "Ambikesh Jayal and Martin Shepperd",
title = "The Problem of Labels in {E}-Assessment of Diagrams",
journal = j-JERIC,
volume = "8",
number = "4",
pages = "12:1--12:??",
month = jan,
year = "2009",
CODEN = "????",
DOI = "https://doi.org/10.1145/1482348.1482351",
ISSN = "1531-4278",
bibdate = "Mon Feb 2 16:27:27 MST 2009",
bibsource = "http://www.acm.org/pubs/contents/journals/jeric/;
http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/jeric.bib",
abstract = "In this article we explore a problematic aspect of
automated assessment of diagrams. Diagrams have partial
and sometimes inconsistent semantics. Typically much of
the meaning of a diagram resides in the labels;
however, the choice of labeling is largely
unrestricted. This means a correct solution may utilize
differing yet semantically equivalent labels to the
specimen solution. With human marking this problem can
be easily overcome. Unfortunately with e-assessment
this is challenging. We empirically explore the scale
of the problem of synonyms by analyzing 160 student
solutions to a UML task. From this we find that
cumulative growth of synonyms only shows a limited
tendency to reduce at the margin despite using a range
of text processing algorithms such as stemming and
auto-correction of spelling errors. This finding has
significant implications for the ease in which we may
develop future e-assessment systems of diagrams, in
that the need for better algorithms for assessing label
semantic similarity becomes inescapable.",
acknowledgement = ack-nhfb,
articleno = "12",
keywords = "diagrams; E-assessment",
}
Related entries
- algorithm, 1-2es-z-z-1,
2(1)131,
5(2)1,
5(3)z-6,
6(1)1,
6(2)1,
8(2)6
- article,
2(1)17,
5(4)1,
5(4)2,
6(1)2,
6(1)3,
6(2)1,
6(2)2,
6(3)1,
6(3)2,
6(3)3,
6(3)5,
6(3)6,
6(4)1,
6(4)4,
7(1)1,
7(1)3,
7(3)1,
7(4)2,
7(4)4,
8(1)1,
8(1)3,
8(2)5,
8(2)6,
8(3)7,
8(3)8,
8(4)10,
8(4)11
- aspect,
6(2)2,
6(3)6,
7(4)6,
8(2)4
- assessment,
5(3)z-1,
5(3)z-4,
6(4)4,
8(1)2
- automated,
5(3)z-1,
5(3)z-3,
5(3)z-5,
7(1)2
- become,
6(1)3,
7(1)1,
8(1)3,
8(3)9
- better,
6(2)1,
6(4)6,
7(4)5,
8(3)7
- challenging,
8(3)9
- choice,
7(4)4
- despite,
6(4)6
- develop,
6(3)5,
6(4)6,
7(1)3,
7(4)1,
8(1)3
- diagram,
5(4)1
- ease,
5(4)1
- error,
5(4)1,
7(4)2
- explore,
7(4)5,
8(3)9
- find,
6(3)3,
7(4)6,
8(3)8
- finding,
5(4)3,
7(1)1,
8(2)5,
8(4)11
- future,
2(1)1,
6(3)5,
8(2)4,
8(3)9
- has,
5(4)1,
6(1)3,
6(3)2,
6(4)3,
6(4)5,
7(4)5,
7(4)6,
8(1)3,
8(3)8
- have,
5(4)1,
5(4)2,
6(1)3,
6(3)2,
6(3)5,
6(4)2,
6(4)3,
6(4)4,
7(1)2,
7(4)5,
8(1)3,
8(2)6,
8(3)7,
8(4)11
- however,
5(4)1,
5(4)2,
8(2)6
- implication,
7(3)2,
7(4)1
- limited,
6(1)3
- may,
2(1)1,
6(2)1,
7(4)6,
8(3)9,
8(4)11
- means,
4(1)1-1,
6(3)3
- much,
7(4)2
- need,
5(4)1,
6(1)1,
6(2)1,
6(3)3,
6(4)6,
7(4)6
- only,
6(1)1,
7(4)3,
8(1)3
- overcome.,
6(4)2
- problem,
2(2)4,
5(3)z-5,
6(3)2,
7(1)2,
7(4)2,
7(4)3,
8(2)5,
8(2)6,
8(3)7,
8(4)11
- processing,
1(4)4,
5(1)1,
6(1)3
- range,
7(4)1
- show,
6(2)1,
6(3)3,
6(4)5
- significant,
6(1)3,
6(4)3,
6(4)5,
7(1)2,
8(3)8,
8(4)10
- solution,
6(4)2,
7(1)3,
8(4)11
- sometimes,
5(4)1
- stemming,
7(4)1
- student,
3(1)1,
3(1)1-1,
3(3)1,
4(1)1,
5(4)1,
5(4)2,
5(4)3,
6(1)2,
6(2)1,
6(3)1,
6(3)2,
6(3)3,
6(3)6,
6(4)1,
6(4)3,
6(4)4,
6(4)5,
7(1)2,
7(1)3,
7(2)1,
7(4)2,
7(4)3,
7(4)4,
7(4)5,
7(4)6,
8(1)2,
8(1)3,
8(2)4,
8(2)5,
8(3)8,
8(3)9,
8(4)11
- such,
5(4)1,
6(2)1,
6(3)1,
6(3)2,
6(3)6,
6(4)2,
8(1)1,
8(2)4
- system, 1-1es-z-z, 1-1es-z-z-2, 1-1es-z-z-6, 1-1es-z-z-7,
2(1)5,
2(4)1,
3(3)1,
4(4)1,
5(3)z-4,
6(1)2,
6(1)3,
6(2)2,
6(3)6,
6(4)2,
6(4)5,
6(4)6,
7(1)2,
7(1)3,
8(1)3,
8(2)6
- task.,
5(4)1
- text,
2(1)17,
5(4)1
- UML,
5(4)1,
7(1)3,
8(1)2
- Unfortunately,
7(1)2
- using, 1-1es-z-z-2, 1-1es-z-z-4,
1(4)111,
2(1)17,
4(2)4,
4(3)1,
4(3)1-1,
6(3)3,
6(4)5,
7(1)3,
7(4)4,
7(4)5,
8(1)3,
8(2)4,
8(3)8,
8(4)11
- which,
2(1)17,
6(1)1,
6(2)1,
6(2)2,
6(3)3,
6(3)5,
7(4)2,
7(4)6,
8(4)10
- yet,
6(4)6