Cited by 3Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningEducational Technology and AssessmentEdcuational Technology Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluate learner level assessment in intelligent e-learning systems using probabilistic network model

Kaliwal, Rohit B., Deshpande, Santosh L.·2022·Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for EDGE Computing

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/b978-0-12-824054-0.00029-0

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 13 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 3

Metadata

Authors
Kaliwal, R. B., & Deshpande, S. L.
Affiliations
Visvesvaraya Technological University (IN)
Venue
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for EDGE Computing
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
2022
Pages
255-265
OpenAlex
W4226396296
Cited by
3
References
13
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.39
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Elsevier eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Edcuational Technology Systems
Keywords
intelligent tutoring systems, student assessment, Bayesian networks, probabilistic networks, learning outcome evaluation, expert systems, teaching model, knowledge base model

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