Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37539292›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Smart education system to improve the learning system with CBR based recommendation system using IoT.

Veeramanickam M R M, Manisha Sachin Dabade, Sita Rama Murty P, Ratnaprabha Ravindra Borhade, Shital Sachin Barekar, Carlos Navarro, Ulises Roman-Concha, Ciro Rodriguez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Veeramanickam M R MChitkara University Institute of Engineering and Technology, Chitkara University, Punjab, India.
Manisha Sachin DabadeDepartment of Information Technology, Walchand College of Engineering, Shivaji University, Sangli, India.
Sita Rama Murty PDepartment of Artificial Intelligence & Data Science, Vishnu Institute of Technology, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Ratnaprabha Ravindra BorhadeDept. of Electronics and Telecommunication, MKSSS's Cummins College of Engineering for Women, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Shital Sachin BarekarDept. of Computer Engineering, MKSSS's Cummins College of Engineering for Women, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Carlos NavarroFaculty of System Engineering, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos UNMSM, Peru.
Ulises Roman-ConchaFaculty of System Engineering, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos UNMSM, Peru.
Ciro RodriguezDepartment of Software Engineering, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos UNMSM, Peru.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last few years, the research fields of intelligent learning systems have been improving the process of learning systems. Smart Tutoring System-(STS) applications have been used in e-learning. The results signify the importance of the learner's engagement in customizing a model. The design outcomes of this IoT-based personalized learning system purely work on the audience's learning requirements, their keyword search, their learning experience levels, proficiency level of subjects, and the type of the course being taught. Students spent an average of 25.67 h accessing textual materials weekly, 27.4 h accessing video assets weekly, and similarly 6.5 h accessing visual learning materials. The research analysis part concludes participants' percentage of learning as per evaluations assessment, which increases whenever the outcome analysis comes with Case-Based Reasoning classifiers-CBR based search model. The findings displayed significant differences before and after learning case by case for every learner as per chosen topic and quiz assessments: 42.57% of the students responded before learning the first question assessments whereas 74.82%, of the students responded, after completion of learning from online resources based on their choice with CBR. Recommendation Model Analysis discussed root means square error-RMSE lies from 10% to 20% for 550 students group size. The RMSE result is 24% for a size of 1600, which is low performance compared to other group sizes. This study focuses on the STS recommendation model for the slow learner group to identify required learning from various online resources.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceInternet of thingsRecommendation systemSmart learning techniques

Identifiers

PMID37539292
PMCPMC10395294

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.