Contributions: An adoption framework to include generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in the university curriculum. It identifies and highlights the role of different stakeholders (university management, students, staff, etc.) during the adoption process. It also proposes an objective approach based upon an evaluation matrix to assess the success and outcome of the GenAI adoption. Background: Universities worldwide are debating and struggling with the adoption of GenAI in their curriculum. GenAI has impacted our perspective on traditional methods of academic integrity and the scholarship of teaching, learning, and research. Both the faculty and students are unsure about the approach in the absence of clear guidelines through the administration and regulators. This requires an established framework to define a process and articulate the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder involved. Research Questions: Whether the academic ecosystem requires a methodology to adopt GenAI into its curriculum? A systematic approach for the academic staff to ensure the students’ learning outcomes are met with the adoption of GenAI. How to measure and communicate the adoption of GenAI in the university setup? Methodology: The methodology employed in this study focuses on examining the university education system and assessing the opportunities and challenges related to incorporating GenAI in teaching and learning. Additionally, it identifies a gap and the absence of a comprehensive framework that obstructs the effective integration of GenAI within the academic environment. Findings: The literature survey results indicate the limited or no adoption of GenAI by the university, which further reflects the dilemma in the minds of different stakeholders. For the successful adoption of GenAI, a standard framework is proposed 1) for effective redesign of the course curriculum; 2) for enabling staff and students; and 3) to define an evaluation matrix to measure the effectiveness and success of the adoption process.

(1) Background: The development of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is transforming knowledge-intensive domains such as Education. However, Large Language Models (LLMs), which serve as the foundational components for GenAI tools, are trained on static datasets, often producing misleading, factually incorrect, or outdated responses. Our study explores the performance gains of Retrieval-Augmented LLMs over baseline LLMs while also identifying the trade-off opportunity between smaller-parameter LLMs augmented with user-specific data to larger parameter LLMs. (2) Methods: We experimented with four different LLMs, each with a different number of parameters, to generate outputs. These outputs were then evaluated across seven lexical and semantic metrics to identify performance trends in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)-Augmented LLMs and analyze the impact of parameter size on LLM performance. (3) Results and Discussions: We have synthesized 968 different combinations to identify this trend with the help of different LLM sizes/parameters: TinyLlama 1.1B, Mistral 7B, Llama 3.1 8B, and Llama 1 13 B. These studies were grouped into two themes: RAG-Augmented LLM percentage improvements to baseline LLMs and compelling trade-off possibilities of RAG-Augmented smaller-parameter LLMs to larger-parameter LLMs. Our experiments show that RAG-Augmented LLMs demonstrate high lexical and semantic scores relative to baseline LLMs. This offers RAG-Augmented LLMs as a compelling trade-off for reducing the number of parameters in LLMs and lowering overall resource demands. (4) Conclusions: The findings outline that by leveraging RAG-Augmented LLMs, smaller-parameter LLMs can perform better or equivalently to large-parameter LLMs, particularly demonstrating strong lexical improvements. They reduce the risks of hallucination and keep the output more contextualized, making them a better choice for knowledge-intensive content in academic and research sectors.

This paper proposes a statistical-based channel modelling approach for a drone assisted multi-user coded cooperation (DA-MUCC) for evaluating the performance metrics of a next-generation wireless communication system. The proposed approach may find its applications in smart cities, disaster management and agriculture for building reliable communication links among ground users (GUs)/user equipments (UEs) over the scenarios where an infrastructure-based network (like a Base Station (BS)) is difficult to establish or disrupted. In such scenarios, an air-to-ground (A2G) channel is modelled based on the probabilistic approach of line-of-sight (LoS) and statistical independence of the links. The network performance of the proposed system model is evaluated by closed-form average outage probability and average rate over the Rayleigh and Rician fading channel models. The analytical performance is corroborated by Monte-Carlo simulations and also compared with the existing state-of-the-art approaches. Finally, we derive the probability density function (PDF) for signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of relay link which is useful under the scenarios where the direct links among GUs are in the deep fade.

In recent years, no other technology has revolutionised our life as Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI). GenAI has gained the attention of a myriad of users in almost every profession. Its advancement has had an intense impact on education, significantly disrupting the assessment design and evaluation methodologies. Despite the potential benefits and possibilities of GenAI in the education sector, there are several concerns primarily centred around academic integrity, authenticity, equity of access, assessment evaluation methodology, and feedback. Consequently, academia is encountering challenges in assessment design that are essential to retaining academic integrity in the age of GenAI. In this article, we discuss the challenges, and opportunities that need to be addressed for the assessment design and evaluation. The article also highlights the importance of clear policy about the usage of GenAI in completing assessment tasks, and also in design approaches to ensure academic integrity and subject learning. Additionally, this article also provides assessment categorisation based on the use of GenAI to cultivate students' and academic professionals' knowledge. It also provides information on the skills necessary to formulate and articulate problems and evaluate the task, enabling students and academics to effectively utilise GenAI tools.

Contributions: An adoption framework to include GenAI in the university curriculum. It identifies and highlights the role of different stakeholders (university management, students, staff, etc.) during the adoption process. It also proposes an objective approach based upon an evaluation matrix to assess the success and outcome of the GenAI adoption. Background: Universities worldwide are debating and struggling with the adoption of GenAI in their curriculum. GenAI has impacted our perspective on traditional methods of academic integrity and the scholarship of teaching, learning, and research. Both the faculty and students are unsure about the approach in the absence of clear guidelines through the administration and regulators. This requires an established framework to define a process and articulate the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder involved. Research Questions: Whether the academic ecosystem requires a methodology to adopt GenAI into its curriculum? A systematic approach for the academic staff to ensure the students' learning outcomes are met with the adoption of GenAI. How to measure and communicate the adoption of GenAI in the university setup? Methodology: The methodology employed in this study focuses on examining the university education system and assessing the opportunities and challenges related to incorporating GenAI in teaching and learning. Additionally, it identifies a gap and the absence of a comprehensive framework that obstructs the effective integration of GenAI within the academic environment. Findings: The literature survey results indicate the limited or no adoption of GenAI by the university, which further reflects the dilemma in the minds of different stakeholders. For the successful adoption of GenAI, a standard framework is proposed i) for effective redesign of the course curriculum, ii) for enabling staff and students, iii) to define an evaluation matrix to measure the effectiveness and success of the adoption process.

Academic integrity is a cornerstone of education systems, yet the rise of contract cheating poses significant challenges for higher education institutions. Current approaches to managing contract cheating often lack the comprehensive structure needed to address the complexities of modern cheating methods. The primary objective of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of the proposed Three-Tier Framework (TTF), designed in our previous study to combat contract cheating. The proposed framework comprises three tiers: awareness, monitoring, and evaluation. It engages stakeholders within the system and encourages a proactive and collaborative stance against contract cheating while reinforcing a culture of academic honesty. The evaluation focuses on three key aspects: the clarity of the framework’s functions and objectives, the potential challenges in implementing the proposed monitoring process, and the perceived limitations in detecting and mitigating contract cheating through this framework. Supervised and unsupervised assignments are considered, excluding the option of e-proctoring, as some students encountered difficulties setting up necessary tools and software for online exams. Survey results reveal a broad consensus among respondents, who expressed strong confidence in the clarity and effectiveness of the framework and its monitoring procedures. These positive perceptions were consistent across respondents, regardless of their prior experience or familiarity with contract cheating. Although the overall feedback was positive, concerns were raised regarding implementing the framework in current educational settings. Specific challenges cited include tight timelines and the increased workload associated with the new procedures, emphasising a need for additional guidance, training, and institutional support to ensure effective adoption. The proposed framework incorporates an instructor dashboard designed to streamline academic workflow and simplify the monitoring process introduced in this framework. The survey results confirm that the framework can be adopted to address the unique needs of academics and diverse educational environments; however further research is needed to explore its applicability across the broader higher education community.