CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 189Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningArtificial Intelligence in EducationOnline Learning and Analytics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Conceptual Framework for Human–AI Hybrid Adaptivity in Education

Open access
Holstein, Kenneth, Aleven, Vincent, Rummel, Nikol·2020·Lecture Notes in Computer Science
DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_20PMC PMC7334162
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_20

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 73 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R.: How People Learn, vol. 11. National Academy Press, Washington, DC (2000)
  2. De-Arteaga, M., Fogliato, R., Chouldechova, A.: A case for humans-in-the-loop: decisions in the presence of erroneous algorithmic scores (2020). arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.08035 · arXiv
  3. Holstein, K.: Designing real-time teacher augmentation to combine strengths of human and AI instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University (2019)
  4. Roll, I., Wiese, E.S., Long, Y., Aleven, V., Koedinger, K.R.: Tutoring self-and co-regulation with intelligent tutoring systems to help students acquire better learning skills. In: Sottilare, R., Graesser, A., Hu, X., Holden, H. (eds.) Design Recommendations for Intelligent Tutoring Systems, vol. 2, pp. 169–182. US Army Research Laboratory, Orlando (2014)
  5. Simard, P.Y., et al.: Machine teaching: a new paradigm for building machine learning systems (2017). arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06742 · arXiv
  6. Zhu, X., Singla, A., Zilles, S., Rafferty, A.N.: An overview of machine teaching (2018). arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.05927 · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–189 of 189

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Holstein, K., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • Ruhr University Bochum (DE)
Corresponding author
Holstein, Kenneth
ORCID
Venue
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published
2020
Pages
240-254
ISSN
  • 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
  • 1611-3349
DOI
10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_20
PMC
PMC7334162
OpenAlex
W3038925583
Cited by
168
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 2
FWCI
5.54
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, adaptive learning systems, human-AI collaboration, conceptual framework, human-AI augmentation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review