This paper describes a test and case study of self-evaluation of online courses during the pandemic time. Due to the Covid-19, the whole world needs to sit on lockdown in different periods. Many things need to be done in all kinds of business including the education sector of countries. To sustain the education development teaching methods had to switch from traditional face-to-face teaching to online courses. The government made decisions in a short time and educational institutions had no time to prepare the materials for the online teaching. All courses of the Mongolian University of Pharmaceutical Sciences switched to online lessons. Challenges were raised before professors and tutors during online teaching. Our university did not have a specific learning management system for online teaching and e-learning. Therefore professors used different platforms for their online teaching such as Zoom, Microsoft teams for instance. Moreover, different social networking platforms played an active role in communication between students and professors. The situation is very difficult for professors and students. To measure the quality of online courses and to figure out the positive and weak points of online teaching we need an evaluation of e-learning. The focus of this paper is to share the evaluation process of e-learning based on a structure-oriented evaluation model.
相關內容
Social networking and micro-blogging services, such as Twitter, play an important role in sharing digital information. Despite the popularity and usefulness of social media, there have been many instances where corrupted users found ways to abuse it, as for instance, through raising or lowering user's credibility. As a result, while social media facilitates an unprecedented ease of access to information, it also introduces a new challenge - that of ascertaining the credibility of shared information. Currently, there is no automated way of determining which news or users are credible and which are not. Hence, establishing a system that can measure the social media user's credibility has become an issue of great importance. Assigning a credibility score to a user has piqued the interest of not only the research community but also most of the big players on both sides - such as Facebook, on the side of industry, and political parties on the societal one. In this work, we created a model which, we hope, will ultimately facilitate and support the increase of trust in the social network communities. Our model collected data and analysed the behaviour of~50,000 politicians on Twitter. Influence score, based on several chosen features, was assigned to each evaluated user. Further, we classified the political Twitter users as either trusted or untrusted using random forest, multilayer perceptron, and support vector machine. An active learning model was used to classify any unlabelled ambiguous records from our dataset. Finally, to measure the performance of the proposed model, we used precision, recall, F1 score, and accuracy as the main evaluation metrics.
Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns, software engineers' daily life was disrupted and they were abruptly forced into working remotely from home. Across one exploratory and one confirmatory study (N = 482), we tested whether a typical working day is different to pre-pandemic times and whether specific tasks are associated with task-specific satisfaction and productivity. To explore the subject domain, we first run a two-wave longitudinal study, where we found that the time software engineers spent doing specific tasks (e.g., coding, bugfixing, helping others) from home was similar to pre-pandemic times. Also, the amount of time developers spent on each task was unrelated to their general well-being, perceived productivity, and other variables such as basic needs. In our confirmatory study, we found that task satisfaction and productivity are predicted by task-specific variables (e.g., how much autonomy software engineers had during coding) but not by task-independent variables such as general resilience or a good work-life balance. Additionally, we found that satisfaction and autonomy were significantly higher when software engineers were helping others and lower when they were bugfixing. Also, contrary to anecdotal evidence, software engineers' satisfaction and productivity during meetings is not lower compared to other tasks. Finally, we discuss implications for software engineers, management, and researchers.
Open software development provides software organizations access to infinite online resource supply. The resource supply is a pool of unknown workers who work from different location and time zone and are interested in performing various type of tasks. Improper task execution in such dynamic and competitive environment leads to zero task registration, zero task submissions or low qualified submissions due to unforeseen reasons such as uncertainty in workers' behavior and performance. Therefore, to ensure effectiveness of open software development, there is a need for improved understanding and visibility into characteristics associated with attracting reliable workers in making qualified submissions and reducing task failure.
Existing evaluation suites for multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) do not assess generalization to novel situations as their primary objective (unlike supervised-learning benchmarks). Our contribution, Melting Pot, is a MARL evaluation suite that fills this gap, and uses reinforcement learning to reduce the human labor required to create novel test scenarios. This works because one agent's behavior constitutes (part of) another agent's environment. To demonstrate scalability, we have created over 80 unique test scenarios covering a broad range of research topics such as social dilemmas, reciprocity, resource sharing, and task partitioning. We apply these test scenarios to standard MARL training algorithms, and demonstrate how Melting Pot reveals weaknesses not apparent from training performance alone.
Evaluating the causal effect of recommendations is an important objective because the causal effect on user interactions can directly leads to an increase in sales and user engagement. To select an optimal recommendation model, it is common to conduct A/B testing to compare model performance. However, A/B testing of causal effects requires a large number of users, making such experiments costly and risky. We therefore propose the first interleaving methods that can efficiently compare recommendation models in terms of causal effects. In contrast to conventional interleaving methods, we measure the outcomes of both items on an interleaved list and items not on the interleaved list, since the causal effect is the difference between outcomes with and without recommendations. To ensure that the evaluations are unbiased, we either select items with equal probability or weight the outcomes using inverse propensity scores. We then verify the unbiasedness and efficiency of online evaluation methods through simulated online experiments. The results indicate that our proposed methods are unbiased and that they have superior efficiency to A/B testing.
This paper focuses on the expected difference in borrower's repayment when there is a change in the lender's credit decisions. Classical estimators overlook the confounding effects and hence the estimation error can be magnificent. As such, we propose another approach to construct the estimators such that the error can be greatly reduced. The proposed estimators are shown to be unbiased, consistent, and robust through a combination of theoretical analysis and numerical testing. Moreover, we compare the power of estimating the causal quantities between the classical estimators and the proposed estimators. The comparison is tested across a wide range of models, including linear regression models, tree-based models, and neural network-based models, under different simulated datasets that exhibit different levels of causality, different degrees of nonlinearity, and different distributional properties. Most importantly, we apply our approaches to a large observational dataset provided by a global technology firm that operates in both the e-commerce and the lending business. We find that the relative reduction of estimation error is strikingly substantial if the causal effects are accounted for correctly.
Meta-reinforcement learning algorithms can enable robots to acquire new skills much more quickly, by leveraging prior experience to learn how to learn. However, much of the current research on meta-reinforcement learning focuses on task distributions that are very narrow. For example, a commonly used meta-reinforcement learning benchmark uses different running velocities for a simulated robot as different tasks. When policies are meta-trained on such narrow task distributions, they cannot possibly generalize to more quickly acquire entirely new tasks. Therefore, if the aim of these methods is to enable faster acquisition of entirely new behaviors, we must evaluate them on task distributions that are sufficiently broad to enable generalization to new behaviors. In this paper, we propose an open-source simulated benchmark for meta-reinforcement learning and multi-task learning consisting of 50 distinct robotic manipulation tasks. Our aim is to make it possible to develop algorithms that generalize to accelerate the acquisition of entirely new, held-out tasks. We evaluate 6 state-of-the-art meta-reinforcement learning and multi-task learning algorithms on these tasks. Surprisingly, while each task and its variations (e.g., with different object positions) can be learned with reasonable success, these algorithms struggle to learn with multiple tasks at the same time, even with as few as ten distinct training tasks. Our analysis and open-source environments pave the way for future research in multi-task learning and meta-learning that can enable meaningful generalization, thereby unlocking the full potential of these methods.
A variety of machine learning models have been proposed to assess the performance of players in professional sports. However, they have only a limited ability to model how player performance depends on the game context. This paper proposes a new approach to capturing game context: we apply Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) to learn an action-value Q function from 3M play-by-play events in the National Hockey League (NHL). The neural network representation integrates both continuous context signals and game history, using a possession-based LSTM. The learned Q-function is used to value players' actions under different game contexts. To assess a player's overall performance, we introduce a novel Game Impact Metric (GIM) that aggregates the values of the player's actions. Empirical Evaluation shows GIM is consistent throughout a play season, and correlates highly with standard success measures and future salary.
Privacy is a major good for users of personalized services such as recommender systems. When applied to the field of health informatics, privacy concerns of users may be amplified, but the possible utility of such services is also high. Despite availability of technologies such as k-anonymity, differential privacy, privacy-aware recommendation, and personalized privacy trade-offs, little research has been conducted on the users' willingness to share health data for usage in such systems. In two conjoint-decision studies (sample size n=521), we investigate importance and utility of privacy-preserving techniques related to sharing of personal health data for k-anonymity and differential privacy. Users were asked to pick a preferred sharing scenario depending on the recipient of the data, the benefit of sharing data, the type of data, and the parameterized privacy. Users disagreed with sharing data for commercial purposes regarding mental illnesses and with high de-anonymization risks but showed little concern when data is used for scientific purposes and is related to physical illnesses. Suggestions for health recommender system development are derived from the findings.
Context: Topic modeling finds human-readable structures in unstructured textual data. A widely used topic modeler is Latent Dirichlet allocation. When run on different datasets, LDA suffers from "order effects" i.e. different topics are generated if the order of training data is shuffled. Such order effects introduce a systematic error for any study. This error can relate to misleading results;specifically, inaccurate topic descriptions and a reduction in the efficacy of text mining classification results. Objective: To provide a method in which distributions generated by LDA are more stable and can be used for further analysis. Method: We use LDADE, a search-based software engineering tool that tunes LDA's parameters using DE (Differential Evolution). LDADE is evaluated on data from a programmer information exchange site (Stackoverflow), title and abstract text of thousands ofSoftware Engineering (SE) papers, and software defect reports from NASA. Results were collected across different implementations of LDA (Python+Scikit-Learn, Scala+Spark); across different platforms (Linux, Macintosh) and for different kinds of LDAs (VEM,or using Gibbs sampling). Results were scored via topic stability and text mining classification accuracy. Results: In all treatments: (i) standard LDA exhibits very large topic instability; (ii) LDADE's tunings dramatically reduce cluster instability; (iii) LDADE also leads to improved performances for supervised as well as unsupervised learning. Conclusion: Due to topic instability, using standard LDA with its "off-the-shelf" settings should now be depreciated. Also, in future, we should require SE papers that use LDA to test and (if needed) mitigate LDA topic instability. Finally, LDADE is a candidate technology for effectively and efficiently reducing that instability.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191