PRE2017 3 Groep14: Difference between revisions

From Control Systems Technology Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(113 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 10: Line 10:
|-
|-
| Sophie van den Eerenbeemt
| Sophie van den Eerenbeemt
|  
| 0954445
|-
|-
| Christine Ingwersen
| Christine Ingwersen
Line 16: Line 16:
|-
|-
| Ellen Mans
| Ellen Mans
|  
| 0956433
|}
|}


= Learning with Smart Home for Kids =
='''Process'''=
[[Process Group 14]]


= Problem Statement =
='''Report'''=
[[Report group 14]]


== Intelligent Quiz Master ==
='''Peer review and Contributions'''=
'''Idea.''' Use a set of arithmic questions (addition, subtraction, fractions) since then it is easy for us to check if it makes sense.
==Peer review==
Also, since most children have difficulties with arithmic this is actually useful.
As all of us have contributed a lot to this project, there was good communication and we do not have any negative remarks about each other, we decided that each of us deserves the same result. This is why we decided on the following peer review results:
* Abby: 7,5
* Christine: 7,5
* Dennis: 7,5
* Ellen: 7,5
* Sophie: 7,5
Of course there is always room for improvement and our project could have been better, which is why we think 7,5 is a good representation of what we have done.


Given a set of questions, the quiz master will test the knowledge of a child, and help the child improve by asking the right questions at the right time.
==Contributions==
We will build an application that selects the next question to ask the child, based on the previous answers the child gave to previous questions.  
We also had 6 hours of meetings each week, so that makes 7*6 = 42 hours extra for everyone.


The quiz master has to:
* Abby
** State of the art - 10 hours
** Desk research - 5 hours
** Programming - 40 hours
** Wiki - 10 hours
* Christine
** State of the art - 10 hours
** Desk research - 30 hours
** Survey - 15 hours
** Wiki - 10 hours
** Program design - 5 hours
* Dennis
** State of the art - 10 hours
** Presentation - 8 hours
** Programming - 45 hours
** Wiki - 10 hours
* Ellen
** State of the art - 10 hours
** Desk research - 30 hours
** Survey - 15 hours
** Wiki - 10 hours
** Presentation - 5 hours
* Sophie
** State of the art - 10 hours
** Presentation slides and demo - 5 hours
** Programming - 45 hours
** Wiki - 10 hours


* Find out the level of knowledge the child has, and ask questions that are on the 'edge' of a childs knowledge in order to improve their knowledge.
='''Coaching Questions'''=
* Optionally invent new questions, similar to the already existing questions.
[[Coaching Questions Group 14]]
 
In order to do so, we must:
 
* Define '''distance''' (or '''question similarity''') between questions, which questions are of similar difficulty. So cluster questions based on their difficulty. Note that this will vary per child.
* Simulate the (increasing/decreasing) knowledge of different children. (To be able to train our app.)
* Construct a (large enough) data set to use parts of it for training and validation.
* Find out what the next '''right''' question would be. Our app should do this, based on the question similarity for a certain child. Educational/psychological: what are the best questions to ask?
 
= Users =
* Children
* Parents
* Teachers
 
== User Requirements ==
 
 
= Approach =
 
== Milestones ==
 
== Deliverables ==
 
 
= Who does what? Planning =
 
 
= State of the Art Literature Study =
 
About similar questions, though used more on Q&A sites to find similar questions. This is not based on difficulty.
<ref> A Topic Clustering Approach to Finding Similar Questions from Large Question and Answer Archives, from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0071511&type=printable</ref>
<ref> ''Deepa Paranjpe'', Clustering Semantically Similar and Related Questions, from https://nlp.stanford.edu/courses/cs224n/2007/fp/paranjpe.pdf</ref>
 
 
= References =
<references/>

Latest revision as of 14:21, 4 April 2018

Student Student Number
Abby Berkers 0951825
Dennis van den Berg 0949036
Sophie van den Eerenbeemt 0954445
Christine Ingwersen 0952530
Ellen Mans 0956433

Process

Process Group 14

Report

Report group 14

Peer review and Contributions

Peer review

As all of us have contributed a lot to this project, there was good communication and we do not have any negative remarks about each other, we decided that each of us deserves the same result. This is why we decided on the following peer review results:

  • Abby: 7,5
  • Christine: 7,5
  • Dennis: 7,5
  • Ellen: 7,5
  • Sophie: 7,5

Of course there is always room for improvement and our project could have been better, which is why we think 7,5 is a good representation of what we have done.

Contributions

We also had 6 hours of meetings each week, so that makes 7*6 = 42 hours extra for everyone.

  • Abby
    • State of the art - 10 hours
    • Desk research - 5 hours
    • Programming - 40 hours
    • Wiki - 10 hours
  • Christine
    • State of the art - 10 hours
    • Desk research - 30 hours
    • Survey - 15 hours
    • Wiki - 10 hours
    • Program design - 5 hours
  • Dennis
    • State of the art - 10 hours
    • Presentation - 8 hours
    • Programming - 45 hours
    • Wiki - 10 hours
  • Ellen
    • State of the art - 10 hours
    • Desk research - 30 hours
    • Survey - 15 hours
    • Wiki - 10 hours
    • Presentation - 5 hours
  • Sophie
    • State of the art - 10 hours
    • Presentation slides and demo - 5 hours
    • Programming - 45 hours
    • Wiki - 10 hours

Coaching Questions

Coaching Questions Group 14

Retrieved from "https://dsdwiki.wtb.tue.nl/index.php?title=PRE2017_3_Groep14&oldid=53836"