SINTA

0.0

Impact

Scholar

9

H-Index

Interval: Indonesian Journal of Mathematical Education

an Open Access Journal

Development of Combinatorial Optimization Models with Discrete Mathematics Methods in Mathematical Physics Courses

Astalini Astalini
Jambi University ROR
Indonesia
astalinizakir@unja.ac.id
Luis Roberto Pino-Fan
Universidad de Los Lagos ROR
Chile
Somjai Boonsiri
Chulalongkorn University ROR
Thailand
U.L. Zainudeen
South Eastern University
Sri Lanka
Tin Nwe Aye
Kyaukse University
Myanmar
Vu Duong
Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology ROR
Viet Nam
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This research aims to develop a combinatorial optimization model based on discrete mathematical methods that can be applied to mathematical physics problems in complex systems, such as molecular energy configurations and viscoelastic system simulations.

    Methodology: The study used a development approach with ADDIE design (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation). Data were obtained through interviews, simulations, and instrument validation involving lecturers and students of mathematical physics.

    Main Findings: The results of the study showed that the developed model had an average accuracy of 85% and a time efficiency of 2.5 seconds per iteration. This model also received positive feedback from users, with an average satisfaction score of 4.6 out of 5.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: The novelty of the research lies in the integration of discrete mathematical methods with combinatorial optimization to solve complex mathematical physics problems.

  • How to cite

    Development of Combinatorial Optimization Models with Discrete Mathematics Methods in Mathematical Physics Courses. (2023). Interval: Indonesian Journal of Mathematical Education, 1(2), 110-117. https://doi.org/10.37251/ijome.v1i2.1354

    More Citation Formats

  • 312
    Abstract views
    230
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. Ü. B. Cebesoy and B. Yeniterzi, “7th Grade Students’ Mathematical Difficulties in Force and Motion Unit,” Turkish J. Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, p. 18, 2016, doi: 10.19128/turje.51242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.51242
    2. N.S. Mumthas and Shyma Usman Abdulla, “Substandard Performance In Mathematical Problem Solving In Physics Among Higher Secondary School Students In Kerala - An Investigation On Teacher Perceptions And Student Difficulties,” Issues Ideas Educ., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 35–43, 2019, doi: 10.15415/iie.2019.71005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15415/iie.2019.71005
    3. Y. Nakakoji and R. Wilson, “First-year mathematics and its application to science: Evidence of transfer of learning to physics and engineering,” Educ. Sci., vol. 8, no. 1, 2018, doi: 10.3390/educsci8010008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010008
    4. Y. Karaca, “Computational Complexity-based Fractional-Order Neural Network Models for the Diagnostic Treatments and Predictive Transdifferentiability of Heterogeneous Cancer Cell Propensity,” Chaos Theory Appl., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 34–51, 2023, doi: 10.51537/chaos.1249532. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51537/chaos.1249532
    5. M. C. Butter, E. M. Aguilera, M. G. B. Quintana, L. J. Pérez, and E. S. Valenzuela, “Quality assurance for postgraduate programs: Design of a model applied on a university in Chile,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 266–292, 2017, doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i1.2670. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i1.2670
    6. K. Vakili and Z. Pourrazavy, “CORRESPONDENCE Khatoon Vakili,” vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 755–761, 2017.
    7. J. Jufrida, W. Kurniawan, A. Astalini, D. Darmaji, D. A. Kurniawan, and W. A. Maya, “Students’ attitude and motivation in mathematical physics,” Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 401–408, 2019, doi: 10.11591/ijere.v8i3.20253. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8i3.20253
    8. E. B. Kırıkkaya and B. Başaran, “Investigation of the effect of the integration of arduino to electrical experiments on students’ attitudes towards technology and ICT by the mixed method,” Eur. J. Educ. Res., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 31–48, 2019, doi: 10.12973/eu-jer.8.1.31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.1.31
    9. H. KOĞAR, “Which scale short form development method is better? A Comparison of ACO, TS, and SCOFA,” Int. J. Assess. Tools Educ., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 583–592, 2022, doi: 10.21449/ijate.946231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.946231
    10. L. S. Ling and S. Krishnasamy, “Information Technology Capability (ITC) Framework to Improve Learning Experience and Academic Achievement of Mathematics in Malaysia,” Electron. J. e-Learning, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 36–51, 2023, doi: 10.34190/ejel.21.1.2169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.21.1.2169
    11. J. Hinojosa, F. L. Martínez-Viviente, V. Garcerán-Hernández, and R. Ruiz-Merino, “Teaching-learning model for the science of electronics,” J. Technol. Sci. Educ., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 87–100, 2020, doi: 10.3926/jotse.604. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.604
    12. P. Emanovský and D. Gonda, “Mathematical calculations within physics lessons and their popularity among learners,” J. Effic. Responsib. Educ. Sci., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 204–211, 2020, doi: 10.7160/ERIESJ.2020.130404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2020.130404
    13. J. A. Bawalsah et al., “Students With and Without Handwriting Difficulties,” vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 2447–2461, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i7.7644
    14. A. M. Alzoebi, M. A. Ghunaimat, and E. A. Alawneh, “The Effects of Flipped Classroom Strategy Based on ‘Addie Model’ for Algebraic Skill Development,” Anatol. J. Educ., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 141–158, 2023, doi: 10.29333/aje.2023.8110a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/aje.2023.8110a
    15. A. Spatioti, I. Kazanidis, and J. Pange, “Educational Design and Evaluation Models of the Learning Effectiveness in E-Learning Process: a Systematic Review,” Turkish Online J. Distance Educ., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 318–347, 2023, doi: 10.17718/tojde.1177297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1177297
    16. P. M. Seloane, S. Ramaila, and M. Ndlovu, “Developing undergraduate engineering mathematics students’ conceptual and procedural knowledge of complex numbers using GeoGebra,” Pythagoras, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2023, doi: 10.4102/PYTHAGORAS.V44I1.763. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v44i1.763
    17. S. Gultom, A. F. Hutauruk, and A. M. Ginting, “Teaching Skills of Teacher in Increasing Student Learning Interest,” Budapest Int. Res. Critics Inst. Humanit. Soc. Sci., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1564–1569, 2020, doi: 10.33258/birci.v3i3.1086. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v3i3.1086
    18. P. Cantor, D. Osher, J. Berg, L. Steyer, and T. Rose, “Malleability, plasticity, and individuality: How children learn and develop in context1,” Appl. Dev. Sci., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 307–337, 2019, doi: 10.1080/10888691.2017.1398649. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1398649
    19. T. Vervust, G. Buyle, F. Bossuyt, and J. Vanfleteren, “Integration of stretchable and washable electronic modules for smart textile applications,” J. Text. Inst., vol. 103, no. 10, pp. 1127–1138, 2012, doi: 10.1080/00405000.2012.664866. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2012.664866
    20. T. Broderick, A. Gelman, R. Meager, A. L. Smith, and T. Zheng, “Our Focus Where trust can break down,” pp. 1–19, 2022.
    21. J. G. Tupouniua, “What challenges emerge when students engage with algorithmatizing tasks?,” J. Pedagog. Res., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 93–107, 2023, doi: 10.33902/JPR.202318518. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202318518
    22. A. Alvarez-Marin and J. A. Velazquez-Iturbide, “Augmented Reality and Engineering Education: A Systematic Review,” IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 817–831, 2021, doi: 10.1109/TLT.2022.3144356. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2022.3144356
    23. A. Barana, M. Marchisio, and F. Roman, “Fostering Problem Solving and Critical Thinking in Mathematics Through Generative Artificial Intelligence,” 20th Int. Conf. Cogn. Explor. Learn. Digit. Age, CELDA 2023, no. Celda, pp. 377–385, 2023, doi: 10.33965/celda2023_202306l046. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33965/CELDA2023_202306L046
    24. T. Pajk, K. Van Isacker, B. Aberšek, and A. Flogie, “Stem education in eco-farming supported by ict and mobile applications,” J. Balt. Sci. Educ., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 277–288, 2021, doi: 10.33225/jbse/21.20.277. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/21.20.277
    25. H. Yilmaz and P. H. Çavaş, “Reliability and Validity Study of the Students ’ Motivation toward Science Learning ( SMTSL ) Questionnaire Fen Ö renimine Yönelik Motivasyon Ölçeğinin Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması,” Elem. Educ. Online, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 430–440, 2007.
    26. Tanti, Astalini, Darmaji, D. A. Kurniawan, and R. Fitriani, “Student Perception Review from Gender : Electronic Moduls of Mathematical Physics,” J. Pendidik. Indones., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 125–132, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/jpiundiksha.v11i1.35107
    27. G. E. Karniadakis, I. G. Kevrekidis, L. Lu, P. Perdikaris, S. Wang, and L. Yang, “Physics-informed machine learning,” Nat. Rev. Phys., vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 422–440, 2021, doi: 10.1038/s42254-021-00314-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00314-5
    28. Syaiful, Kamid, D. A. Kurniawan, and P. A. Rivani, “The impact of project-based learning on students’ achievement in mathematics,” J. Educ. Res. Eval., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 558–567, 2021, doi: 10.48081/kxbi5168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/jere.v5i4.37183
    29. I. Dalaila, P. Widiyaningrum, and S. Saptono, “Developing E-Module Based on Socio-Scientific Issues to Improve Students Scientific Literacy,” J. Innov. Sci. Educ., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 285–294, 2022, doi: 10.15294/jise.v10i1.54500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jise.v10i1.54500
    30. S. Rahayu, A. R. Hakim, P. D. Yuliana, and I. Ladamay, “Integrated Thematic Oriented ‘Pop Up Book’ Development on Thematic Learning for Lower Grade Elementary School,” Int. J. Elem. Educ., vol. 5, no. 4, p. 666, 2021, doi: 10.23887/ijee.v5i4.41096. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/ijee.v5i4.41096
    31. Matsun, V. S. Andrini, T. W. Maduretno, and A. C. Yusro, “Development of physics learning e-module based on local culture wisdom in Pontianak,West Kalimantan,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1381, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1381/1/012045. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1381/1/012045
    32. D. Setiawan, “The development of authentic assessment instrument to expand the character values of citizenship education at primary school No 104202 and No 106811 Bandar Setia, Medan, Indonesia,” Budapest Int. Res. Critics Linguist. Educ. J., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 79–90, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.33258/birle.v2i1.188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33258/birle.v2i1.188
    33. S. Mundarti and F. T. Aldila, “Affective Assessment Instrument Based on Krathwohl-Anderson Taxonomy in Senior High School,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 74–79, 2023, doi: 10.37251/jee.v4i2.323. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v4i2.323
    34. A. A. Zamista, H. Rahmi, and Juni, “Development of Physics Module based on Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning as a Tool to Increase Student Science Process Skills,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1233, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012067. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012067
    35. W. H. Woo, “Applying ADDIE model to ideate precision medicine in a polytechnic biomedical science programme,” J. Biomed. Educ., vol. 2018, pp. 1–5, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.1155/2018/4268517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4268517
    36. L. S. Putri, Y. Setiani, and C. A. H. F. Santosa, “E-Modul Matematika Berbasis Problem Based Learning Bermuatan Pengetahuan Budaya Lokal untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah,” J. Educ. FKIP UNMA, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 880–890, 2023, doi: 10.31949/educatio.v9i2.5002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31949/educatio.v9i2.5002
    37. Nurul Fadila, “Pengembangan Modul Matematika Berbasis Accelerated Learning pada Materi Himpunan di SMPN 1 Kota Jambi,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 19–23, 2022, doi: 10.37251/jee.v3i1.217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v3i1.217
    38. V. Phan, L. Wright, and B. Decent, “Addressing Competing Objectives in Allocating Funds to Scholarships and Need-based Financial Aid,” Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Educ. Data Mining, EDM 2022, no. July, pp. 110–121, 2022, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6853028.
    39. S. Schallert, Z. Lavicza, and E. Vandervieren, “Merging flipped classroom approaches with the 5E inquiry model: a design heuristic,” Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol., vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 1528–1545, 2022, doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2020.1831092. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1831092
    40. N. Kesorn, P. Junpeng, M. Marwiang, K. Pongboriboon, K. N. Tang, and M. Wilson, “Development of an assessment tool for mathematical reading, analytical thinking and mathematical writing,” Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ., vol. 9, no. 4, p. 955, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20505