Cited by 66AI in Service InteractionsArtificial Intelligence in EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

How chatbots can be involved in the education process

Ondas, Stanislav, Pleva, Matus, Hladek, Daniel·2019·2019 17th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA)

Abstract

Chatbots become more and more popular in the human-machine interactions, because they enable to communicate with the system by the human language, which is a very intuitive and user-friendly. Moreover, chatbots can provide information without time-demanding searching and hide its complexity. Three chatbots were developed for supporting education on the Department of electronics and multimedia telecommunications. First one is the KEMTbot, which is a bot located on the department web page. It provides information from the web and about department staff. The second chatbot is a bot that supports students during the exercises from the subject “Databases”. The last one is a chatbot-like Amazon Alexa skill, which answers questions about the department on Amazon Echo devices.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/iceta48886.2019.9040095

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Some teaching agents recommended tutorials to students based upon learning styles, students' historical learning, and pattern matching.

    “some teaching agents recommended tutorials to students based upon learning styles (Redondo-Hernández & Pérez-Marín, 2011), students' historical learning (Coronado et al., 2018), and pattern matching (Ondáš et al., 2019).”

    From Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as Ondáš et al., 2019

  • About 62.5% of the students in Ondáš et al. (2019) said they would use the chatbot again.

    “About 62.5% of the students said they would use the chatbot again.”

    From Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as Ondáš et al., 2019

  • The students in Ondáš et al. (2019) found the chatbot tool helpful and efficient.

    “The students found the tool helpful and efficient, albeit they wanted more features such as more information about courses and departments.”

    From Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as Ondáš et al., 2019

  • The students in Ondáš et al. (2019) wanted more features such as more information about courses and departments.

    “The students found the tool helpful and efficient, albeit they wanted more features such as more information about courses and departments.”

    From Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as Ondáš et al., 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ondas, S., Pleva, M., & Hladek, D.
Venue
2019 17th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-11
Pages
575-580
OpenAlex
W3011694294
Cited by
65
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 2
FWCI
2.20
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
chatbots, educational chatbots, human-machine interaction, database education, voice assistants, information retrieval, web information retrieval, student support

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