Cited by 33Text Readability and SimplificationText and Document Classification TechnologiesArtificial Intelligence in Education

CLASSIFICATION OF THE EDUCATIONAL TEXTS STYLES WITH THE METHODS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Open access
Horáková, Tereza, Houška, Milan, Dömeová, Ludmila·2017·Journal of Baltic Science Education

Abstract

Modern educational methods emphasize the necessity to transfer knowledge instead of data or information within the educational process. Thus it is important to the educational texts supporting the educational process contain knowledge in a particular textual representation. But it is not trivial to decide whether the particular piece of text contain knowledge or not. The solution is to measure the similarity between the particular text structure and a typical structure of a knowledge-designed text. This research aims at analysing the classification ability of three commonly-used classification techniques: artificial neural networks (ANNs), classification and regression trees (CARTs) and decision trees (bigMLs) to separate texts or text fragments into two groups. The texts in the first group contain mainly data and information (common texts), the texts in the other group contain knowledge in one of the particular knowledge representations (knowledge texts). The sample of 120 text fragments was used for the analysis. The results show that the ANN techniques are significantly more able to make the right classification of the text than the CART or bigML ones, and evidence good classification abilities. Thus the ANN approach could broaden the set of methods used for evaluation of difficulty of educational texts or textbooks. Keywords: artificial intelligence, classification and regression trees, educational texts, knowledge representation, knowledge unit, production rules, stylometric analysis.

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 · 10.33225/jbse/17.16.324

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Classification demarcates knowledge content, which contributes to the accuracy of text analysis.

    “Classification demarcates knowledge content, which contributes to the accuracy of text analysis [3].”

    From A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020 (2021) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Conclusions say the classifiers distinguish knowledge-style from common-style educational texts and that the findings are useful for knowledge-content analysis. The paper measures classification correctness, but it does not show that classification improves the accuracy of text analysis; that further claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Previous research has found three basic models of AI in knowledge processing: knowledge representation, knowledge obtaining, and knowledge derivation.

    “previous research has found three basic models of AI in knowledge processing: knowledge representation, knowledge obtaining, and knowledge derivation [3].”
  • Horakova et al. found that artificial neural networks were significantly more effective than regression trees and decision trees to separate educational texts or text fragments.

    “e results show that artificial neural networks (ANNs) were significantly more effective than regression trees and decision trees to separate educational texts or text fragments.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Ackoff, R. L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16 (1), 3-9.
  2. Bishop, C. M. (2005). Neural networks for pattern recognition. Oxford: Oxford university press.
  3. Horáková, T., & Houška, M. (2016). Differences among knowledge and normal educational texts: a fMRI Study. In 11th International Scientific Conference on Distance Learning in Applied Informatics, Štúrovo, Slovakia: Wolters Kluwer, 523-532.
  4. Horáková, T., & Rydval, J. (2015). Using text mining for the improvement of didactic tools in language acquisition. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2015), Prague, 163-173.
  5. Houška, M., & Rauchová, T. (2013). Methodology of creating the knowledge text. In: Proceedings of the 10 th International Confer- ence on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education. Prague: Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, Department of Systems Engineering, 2013, 197-203, [CD ROM].
  6. Hűbelová, D. (2010). Analyses textbooks regional geography for primary school. Geographical Information, 14 (1), 55-63.
  7. Hüllermeier, E. (2008). Fuzzy sets in machine learning and data mining. Applied Soft Computing Journal, 11, 1493-1505. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2008.01.004. · DOI
  8. Srivastava, A. N., & Sahami, M. (2009). Text mining: Classification, clustering, and applications. New York: CRC Press
  9. Taylor & Francis.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Horáková, T., Houška, M., & Dömeová, L.
Affiliations
Czech University of Life Sciences Prague (CZ)
Venue
Journal of Baltic Science Education
Published
2017-06-25
Volume
16
Issue
3
Pages
324-336
ISSN
  • 1648-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 2538-7138
OpenAlex
W2746677022
Cited by
33
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
Journal of Baltic Science Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text Readability and Simplification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
educational texts, knowledge representation, artificial neural networks, classification and regression trees, decision tree, stylometry, production rules, knowledge units

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