|
Title:
|
EXTRACTION OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTENTIONS OF ADVISING TO ACADEMIC PAPER AND ITS REVISION BASED ON ANALYSIS OF GAZE AND COMMENTS |
|
Author(s):
|
Kodai Kobayashi, Hiroki Nakayama, Ryo Onuma, Hiroaki Kaminaga, Youzou Miyadera and Shoichi Nakamura |
|
ISBN:
|
978-989-8704-62 |
|
Editors:
|
Paula Miranda and Pedro IsaĆas |
|
Year:
|
2024 |
|
Edition:
|
Single |
|
Keywords:
|
Paper Refining Support, Differences Between Correction and Revision Intention, Eye Gaze Movements, Refinement
Circumstances, Information Visualization |
|
Type:
|
Full |
|
First Page:
|
151 |
|
Last Page:
|
157 |
|
Language:
|
English |
|
Cover:
|
|
|
Full Contents:
|
click to dowload
|
|
Paper Abstract:
|
Careful revision is crucial in the process of writing an academic paper, however there is a limit to how much
inexperienced students can improve papers on their own. Consequently, students generally ask professors to correct their
papers and then implement revisions on the basis of the professors' remarks and comments. However, due to time
constraints, professors are often unable to explain their intentions of the correction in detail, and the students therefore
have an insufficient understanding of how to actually revise a paper from the suggested corrections. In this study, we
propose a method for extracting the differences between correction and revision intentions based on an analysis of the
gaze movements of professors and inexperienced students in academic paper refinements. We also develop a method for
prioritizing which portions of the paper should be refined. Therefore, we aim to realize a novel method of supporting
paper refinement that emphasizes the understanding of the improvement policy and its circumstances. This paper
provides outlines of our two methods for estimating correction and revision intentions, a method for detecting differences
between their intentions and overview of the support system that aims to implement these methods. Additionally, we
describe the experiments we conducted to evaluate the estimation accuracies of correction and revision intentions and
discuss the features of the proposed methods on the basis of the results. |
|
|
|
|
|
|