2016 SAI Computing Conference (SAI) 2016
DOI: 10.1109/sai.2016.7556079
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Data collection and processing for a multimodal learning analytic system

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The data on the server are further processed for extracting LA and statistics. For details about the architecture please refer to Ruffaldi, Dabisias, Landolfi, and Spikol (2016).…”
Section: Pelars Lasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The data on the server are further processed for extracting LA and statistics. For details about the architecture please refer to Ruffaldi, Dabisias, Landolfi, and Spikol (2016).…”
Section: Pelars Lasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides the toolkit, the learners and observers used mobile devices to capture multimedia data (text, images and video) to self-document the learning activities. Overall, the PELARS project has developed an intelligent system for collecting activity data for diverse learning analytics (with data-mining, reasoning and visualisations) and active user-generated material and digital content (mobile tools) from practice-based activities [28]. The Talkoo toolkit was used and evaluated in combination with the PELARS LAS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We reviewed 18 data infrastructures in MMLA (nine from our last review [Di Mitri et al, 2017, Muñoz-Cristóbal et al, 2018, Fiaidhi, 2014, Domínguez and Chiluiza, 2016, Ruffaldi et al, 2016, Harrer, 2013, Berg et al, 2016, Wagner et al, 2011, Segal et al, 2017 and nine proposed after our review , Munoz et al, 2018, Tamura et al, 2019, Ciordas-Hertel et al, 2019, Huertas Celdrán et al, 2020, Camacho et al, 2020, Domínguez et al, 2021, Serrano Iglesias et al, 2021, Slupczynski and Klamma, 2021). We started our review by finding out how many learning tools were supported in the proposals.…”
Section: Existing Mmla Infrastructuresmentioning
confidence: 99%