Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article Special Issues

Factors influencing secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software: A partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method


  • Received: 01 June 2023 Revised: 24 July 2023 Accepted: 02 August 2023 Published: 16 August 2023
  • Dynamic mathematics software, such as GeoGebra, is a kind of subject-specific digital tool used for enabling users to create mathematical objects and operate them dynamically and interactively, which is very suitable for mathematics teaching and learning at all school levels, especially at the secondary school level. However, limited research has focused on how multiple influencing factors of secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software work together. Based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model, combined with the concept of self-efficacy, this study proposed a conceptual model used to analyze the factors influencing secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software. Valid questionnaire data were provided by 393 secondary school mathematics teachers in the Hunan province of China and analyzed using a partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method. The results showed that social influence, performance expectancy and effort expectancy significantly and positively affected secondary school teachers' behavioral intentions of dynamic mathematics software, and social influence was the greatest influential factor. In the meantime, facilitating conditions, self-efficacy and behavioral intention had significant and positive effects on secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software, and facilitating conditions were the greatest influential factor. Results from the multi-group analysis indicated that gender and teaching experience did not have significant moderating effects on all relationships in the dynamic mathematics software usage conceptual model. However, major had a moderating effect on the relationship between self-efficacy and usage behavior, as well as the relationship between behavioral intention and usage behavior. In addition, training had a moderating effect on the relationship between social influence and behavioral intention. This study has made a significant contribution to the development of a conceptual model that could be used to explore how multiple factors affected secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software. It also benefits the government, schools and universities in enhancing teachers' digital teaching competencies.

    Citation: Zhiqiang Yuan, Xi Deng, Tianzi Ding, Jing Liu, Qi Tan. Factors influencing secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software: A partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(9): 5649-5684. doi: 10.3934/era.2023287

    Related Papers:

    [1] Senli Liu, Haibo Chen . Existence and asymptotic behaviour of positive ground state solution for critical Schrödinger-Bopp-Podolsky system. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(6): 2138-2164. doi: 10.3934/era.2022108
    [2] Lingzheng Kong, Haibo Chen . Normalized solutions for nonlinear Kirchhoff type equations in high dimensions. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(4): 1282-1295. doi: 10.3934/era.2022067
    [3] Hui Jian, Min Gong, Meixia Cai . Global existence, blow-up and mass concentration for the inhomogeneous nonlinear Schrödinger equation with inverse-square potential. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(12): 7427-7451. doi: 10.3934/era.2023375
    [4] Tao Zhang, Tingzhi Cheng . A priori estimates of solutions to nonlinear fractional Laplacian equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(2): 1119-1133. doi: 10.3934/era.2023056
    [5] Li Cai, Fubao Zhang . The Brezis-Nirenberg type double critical problem for a class of Schrödinger-Poisson equations. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(3): 2475-2488. doi: 10.3934/era.2020125
    [6] Changmu Chu, Jiaquan Liu, Zhi-Qiang Wang . Sign-changing solutions for Schrödinger system with critical growth. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(1): 242-256. doi: 10.3934/era.2022013
    [7] Yaning Li, Yuting Yang . The critical exponents for a semilinear fractional pseudo-parabolic equation with nonlinear memory in a bounded domain. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(5): 2555-2567. doi: 10.3934/era.2023129
    [8] Quanqing Li, Zhipeng Yang . Existence of normalized solutions for a Sobolev supercritical Schrödinger equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(12): 6761-6771. doi: 10.3934/era.2024316
    [9] Bin Zhen, Wenwen Liu, Lijun Pei . An analytic estimation for the largest Lyapunov exponent of the Rössler chaotic system based on the synchronization method. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(4): 2642-2664. doi: 10.3934/era.2024120
    [10] Huali Wang, Ping Li . Fractional integral associated with the Schrödinger operators on variable exponent space. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(11): 6833-6843. doi: 10.3934/era.2023345
  • Dynamic mathematics software, such as GeoGebra, is a kind of subject-specific digital tool used for enabling users to create mathematical objects and operate them dynamically and interactively, which is very suitable for mathematics teaching and learning at all school levels, especially at the secondary school level. However, limited research has focused on how multiple influencing factors of secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software work together. Based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model, combined with the concept of self-efficacy, this study proposed a conceptual model used to analyze the factors influencing secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software. Valid questionnaire data were provided by 393 secondary school mathematics teachers in the Hunan province of China and analyzed using a partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method. The results showed that social influence, performance expectancy and effort expectancy significantly and positively affected secondary school teachers' behavioral intentions of dynamic mathematics software, and social influence was the greatest influential factor. In the meantime, facilitating conditions, self-efficacy and behavioral intention had significant and positive effects on secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software, and facilitating conditions were the greatest influential factor. Results from the multi-group analysis indicated that gender and teaching experience did not have significant moderating effects on all relationships in the dynamic mathematics software usage conceptual model. However, major had a moderating effect on the relationship between self-efficacy and usage behavior, as well as the relationship between behavioral intention and usage behavior. In addition, training had a moderating effect on the relationship between social influence and behavioral intention. This study has made a significant contribution to the development of a conceptual model that could be used to explore how multiple factors affected secondary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software. It also benefits the government, schools and universities in enhancing teachers' digital teaching competencies.



    In this paper we consider solitary wave solutions of the time-dependent coupled nonlinear Schrödinger system with perturbation

    {iΦ1tΔΦ1=μ1|Φ1|2Φ1+β|Φ2|2Φ1+f1(x),xΩ, t>0,iΦ2tΔΦ2=μ2|Φ2|2Φ2+β|Φ1|2Φ2+f2(x),xΩ, t>0,Φ1(t,x)=Φ2(t,x)=0,xΩ, t>0, j=1,2, (1.1)

    where ΩRN is a smooth bounded domain, i is the imaginary unit, μ1,μ2>0 and β0 is a coupling constant. When N3, the system (1.1) appears in many physical problems, especially in nonlinear optics. Physically, the solution j denotes the j-th component of the beam in Kerr-like photorefractive media (see [1]). The positive constant μj is for self-focusing in the j th component of the beam. The coupling constant β is the interaction between the two components of the beam. The problem (1.1) also arises in the Hartree-Fock theory for a double condensate, that is, a binary mixture of Bose-Einstein condensates in two different hyperfine states, for more information, see [2].

    If we looking for the stationary solution of the system (1.1), i.e., the solution is independent of time t. Then the system (1.1) is reduced to the following elliptic system with perturbation

    {Δu+λ1u=μ1|u|2u+βuv2+f1(x),xΩ,Δv+λ2v=μ2|v|2v+βu2v+f2(x),xΩ,u=v=0,xΩ. (1.2)

    In the case where N3 and f1=f2=0, then the nonlinearity and the coupling terms in (1.2) are subcritical, and the existence of solutions has recently received great interest, for instance, see [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11] for the existence of a (least energy) solution, and [12,13,14,15,16] for semiclassical states or singularly perturbed settings, and [17,18,19,20,21,22] for the existence of multiple solutions.

    In the present paper we consider the case when N=4 and p=2=4 is the Sobolev critical exponent. If f1=f2=0, the paper [23] proved the existence of positive least energy solution for negative β, positive small β and positive large β.Furthermore, for the case λ1=λ2, they obtained the uniqueness of positive least energy solutions and they studied the limit behavior of the least energy solutions in the repulsive case β, and phase separation is obtained. Later, the paper [24] studied the high dimensional case N5. The paper [25] proved the existence of sign-changing solutions of (1.2). Recently, the paper [26] considered the system (1.2) with perturbation in dimension N3. By using Nehari manifold methods, the authors proved the existence of a positive ground state solution and a positive bound state solution. To the best of our knowledge, the existence of multiple nontrivial solution to the system (1.2) with critical growth(N=4) is still unknown. In the present paper we shall fill this gap.

    Another motivation to study the existence of multiple nontrivial solution of (1.2) is coming from studying of the scalar critical equation. In fact, the second-order semilinear and quasilinear problems have been object of intensive research in the last years. In the pioneering work [27], Brezis and Nirenberg have studied the existence of positive solutions of the scalar equation

    {Δu=up+f,xΩ,u>0,xΩ,u=0,xΩ, (1.3)

    where Ω is a bounded smooth domain in RN, N3, p=N+2N2, f(x,u) is a lower order perturbation of up. Particularly, when f=λu, where λR is a constant, they have discovered the following remarkable phenomenon: the qualitative behavior of the set of solutions of (1.7) is highly sensitive to N, the dimension of the space. Precisely, the paper [27] has shown that, in dimension N4, there exists a positive solution of (1.3), if and only if λ(0,λ1); while, in dimension N=3 and when Ω=B1 is the unit ball, there exists a positive solution of (1.7), if and only if λ(λ1/4,λ1), where λ1>0 is the first eigenvalue of Δ in Ω. The paper [28] proved the existence of both radial and nonradial solutions to the problem

    {Δu=b(r)up+f(r,u),xΩ,r=|x|,u>0,xΩ,u=0,xΩ (1.4)

    under some assumptions on b(r) and f(r,u), p=N+2N2, where Ω=B(0,1) is the unit ball in RN. In the paper [29], G. Tarantello considered the critical case for (1.3). He proved that (1.3) has at least two solutions under some conditions of f: f0, fH1 and

    fH1<cNSN4,cN=4N2(N2N+2)N+24, (1.5)

    and

    S=infuH10(Ω){0}|u|22|u|24 (1.6)

    is the best Sobolev constant of the imbedding from H10(Ω) to Lp(Ω). For more results on this direction we refer the readers to [30,31,32,33,34,35] and the references therein.

    Motivated by the above works, in the present paper, we are interested in the critical coupled Schrödinger equations in (1.2) with λ1=λ2=0

    {Δu=μ1u3+βuv2+f1,xΩ,Δv=μ2v3+βu2v+f2,xΩ,u=v=0,xΩ. (1.7)

    where Ω is a smooth bounded domain in R4, Δ is the Laplace operator and p=2=4 is the Sobolev critical exponent, and μ1>0,μ2>0,0<βmin{μ1,μ2}.

    Obviously, the energy functional is denoted by

    I(u,v)=12Ω(|u|2+|v|2)dx14Ω(μ1|u|4+μ2|v|4+2βu2v2)dxΩ(f1u+f2v)dx (1.8)

    for (u,v)H=H10(Ω)×H10(Ω). So, the critical point of I(u,v) is the solution of the system (1.7). We shall fill the gap and generalize the results of [26] to the critical case. Our main tool here is the Nehari manifold method which is similar to the fibering method of Pohozaev's, which was first used by Tarantello [29].

    We define thee Nehari manifold

    N={(u,v)H|I(u,v)(u,v)=0}. (1.9)

    It is clear that all critical points of I lie in the Nehari manifold, and it is usually effective to consider the existence of critical points in this smaller subset of the Sobolev space. For fixed (u,v)H{(0,0)}, we set

    g(t)=I(tu,tv)=A2t2B4t4Dt,t>0.

    where

    A=Ω(|u|2+|v|2)dx,B=Ω(μ1|u|4+μ2|v|4+2βu2v2)dx,D=Ω(f1u+f2v)dx. (1.10)

    The mapping g(t) is called fibering map. Such maps are often used to investigate Nehari manifold for various semilinear problem. By using the relationship of I and g(t), we can divide N into three parts as follow:

    N+={(u,v)N|A3B>0},N0={(u,v)N|A3B=0},N={(u,v)N|A3B<0}.

    In order to get our results, we assume that fi satisfies

    fi0,fiL43(Ω),|fi|43<S3233K12,i=1,2, (1.11)

    where K=max{μ1,μ2}, S is defined in (1.6). Then we have the following main results.

    Theorem 1.1. Assume that 0<βmin{μ1,μ2}, and f1,f2 satisfies (1.11). Then

    infNI=infN+I=c0 (1.12)

    is achieved at a point (u0,v0)N. Furthermore, (u0,v0) is a critical point of I.

    Next we consider then following minimization problem

    infNI=c1. (1.13)

    Then we have the following result.

    Theorem 1.2. Assume that 0<βmin{μ1,μ2}, and f1,f2 satisfies (1.11). Then c1>c0 and the infimum in (1.13) is achieved at a point (u1,v1)N, which is the second critical point of I.

    Remark 1.3. We point out that to the best of our knowledge, the existence of multiple nontrivial solution to the system (1.2) with critical growth(N=4) is still unknown. In the present paper we shall fill this gap and generalized the results of [26] to the critical case.

    Throughout the paper, we shall use the following notation.

    ● Let (,) be the inner product of the usual Sobolev space H10(Ω) defined by (u,v)=Ωuvdx, and the corresponding norm is u=(u,u)12.

    ● Let S=infuH10(Ω){0}(|u|22/|u|24) be the best Sobolev constant of the imbedding from H10(Ω) to L4(Ω).

    |u|p is the norm of Lp(Ω) defined by |u|p=(Ω|u|pdx)1p, for 0<p<.

    ● Let (u,v)2=Ω(|u|2+|v|2)dx be the norm in the space of H=H10(Ω)×H10(Ω).

    ● Let C or Ci(i=1,2,...) denote the different positive constants.

    We shall use the variational methods to prove the main results. In this section we shall prove some basic results for the system (1.2). The next lemma states the purpose of the assuptions (1.11).

    Lemma 2.1. Assume that the conditions of Theorem 1.1 hold. Thenfor every (u,v)H{(0,0)}, there exists a uniquet1>0 such that (t1u,t1v)N. In particular, wehave

    t1>t0:=[A3B]12 (2.1)

    and g(t1)=maxtt0g(t), where A and B are given in (1.10). Moreover, if D>0, then there exists a unique t2>0, such that (t2u,t2v)N+, where D>0 is given in (1.10). In particular, one has

    t2<t0andI(t2u,t2v)I(tu,tv),t[0,t1]. (2.2)

    Proof. We first define the fibering map by

    g(t)=A2t2B4t4Dt,t>0.

    Then we have

    g(t)=AtBt3D=Φ(t)D.

    We deduce from Φ(t)=0 that

    t=t0=[A3B]12.

    If 0<t<t0, we have g(t)=Φ(t)>0, and if t>t0, one sees g(t)=Φ(t)<0. A direct computation shows that Φ(t) achieves its maximum at t0 and Φ(t0)=233A32B12.

    From the assumption (1.11), Sobolev's and Hölder's inequalities, we infer that

    D=Ω(f1u+f2v)dx|f1|43|u|4+|f2|43|v|4(|f1|243+|f2|243)(|u|24+|v|24)2max{|f1|43,|f2|43}(|u|24+|v|24)12<2S3233K12(|u|24+|v|24)12. (2.3)

    On the other hand, since 0<βmin{μ1,μ2}, it follows that

    Φ(t0)=233A32B12=233(Ω(|u|2+|v|2)dx)32(Ω(μ1|u|4+μ2|v|4+2βu2v2)dx)12233S32(|u|24+|v|24)32K12(Ω(|u|4+|v|4+2βu2v2)dx)122S3233K12(|u|24+|v|24)322(|u|44+|v|44)122S3233K12(|u|24+|v|24)32|u|24+|v|24=2S3233K12(|u|24+|v|24)12,

    where K=max{μ1,μ2}. Hence we get

    g(t0)=Φ(t0)D>0andg(t),ast+. (2.4)

    Thus, there exists an unique t1>t0 such that g(t1)=0. We infer from the monotonicity of Φ(t) that for t1>t0

    g(t1)=Φ(t1)<0,t21Φ(t1)=t21(A3Bt21)<0.

    This implies that (t1u,t1v)N. If D>0, then we have g(0)=Φ(0)D=D<0. Furthermore, there exists an unique t2[0,t0] such that g(t2)=0 and Φ(t2)=D. A direct computation shows that (t2u,t2v)N+ and I(t2u,t2v)I(tu,tv),t[0,t1].

    Next we study the structure of N0.

    Lemma 2.2. Let fi0(i=1,2) satisfy (1.11). Then for every(u,v)N{(0,0)}, we have

    Ω(|u|2+|v|2)dx3Ω(μ1|u|4+μ2|v|4+2βu2v2)dx0. (2.5)

    Hence we can get the conclusion that N0={(0,0)}.

    Proof. In order to prove that N0={(0,0)}, we only need to show that for (u,v)H{(0,0)}, g(t) has no critical point that is a turning point. We use contradiction argument. Assume that there exists (u,v)(0,0) such that (t0u,t0v)N0 and t0>0. Thus, we get

    g(t0)=At0Bt30D=0andg(t0)=A3Bt20=0.

    Then we have t0=[A3B]12. This contradicts (2.4). This finishes the proof.

    In the next lemma, we shall prove the properties of Nehari manifolds N.

    Lemma 2.3. Let fi0(i=1,2) satisfy (1.11). For (u,v)N{(0,0)}, then there exist ε>0 anda differentiable function t=t(w,z)>0,(w,z)H,(w,z)<ε, and satisfying the following conditions

    t(0,0)=1,t(w,z)((u,v)(w,z))N,(w,z)<ε,

    and

    <t(0,0),(w,z)>=2Ω(uw+vz)dx4Ω[μ1|u|2uw+μ2|v|2vz+β(uv2w+u2vz)]dxΩ(f1w+f2z)dxΩ(|u|2+|v|2)dx3Ω(μ1|u|4+μ2|v|4+2βu2v2)dx.

    Proof. We define F:R×HR by

    F(t,(w,z))=t(uw)22+t(vz)22t3Ω(μ1|uw|4+μ2|vz|4+2β(uw)2(vz)2)dxΩ(f1(uw)+f2(vz))dx.

    We deduce from Lemma 2.2 and (u,v)N that F(1,(0,0))=0. Moreover, one has

    Ft(1,(0,0))=Ω(|u|2+|v|2)dx3Ω(μ1|u|4+μ2|v|4+2βu2v2)dx0.

    By applying the implicit function theorem at point (1, (0, 0)), we can obtain the results.

    In this section we are devoted to proving Theorem 1.1. We begin the following lemma for the property of infI.

    Lemma 3.1. Let

    c0=infNI=infN+I.

    Hence I is bounded from below in N and c0<0.

    Proof. For (u,v)N, we have I(u,v),(u,v)=0. We infer from (1.10) that ABD=0. Thus, one deduces from (2.3) and Hölder inequality that

    D<C(|u|24+|v|24)12C1(|u|22+|v|22)12=C1A12.

    Hence, one deduces that

    I(u,v)=A2B4D=A43D4>A4C2A12.

    Thus, the infimum c0 in N+ is bounded from below. Next we prove the upper bound for c0. Let wiH10(Ω)(i=1,2) be the solution for Δw=fi,(i=1,2). So, for fi0 one sees that

    Ω(f1w1+f2w2)dx=|w1|22+|w2|22>0.

    We let t2=t2(u,v)>0 as defined by Lemma 2.1. Thus, we infer that (t2w1,t2w2)N+ and

    t22Ω(|w1|2+|w2|2)dxt42Ω(μ1|w1|4+μ2|w2|4+2βw21w22)dxt2Ω(f1w1+f2w2)dx=0.

    Furthermore, it follows from (2.2) that

    c0=inf(u,v)N+I(u,v)I(t2w1,t2w2))<I(0,0)=0.

    This completes the proof.

    The next lemma studies the properties of the infimum c0.

    Lemma 3.2.

    (1) The level c0 can be attained. That is, there exists(u0,v0)N+ such that I(u0,v0)=c0.

    (2) (u0,v0) is a local minimum for I in H.

    Proof. From Lemma 3.1, we can apply Ekeland's variational principle to the minimization problem, which gives a minimizing sequence {(un,vn)}N such that

    (i) I(un,vn)<c0+1n,

    (ii) I(w,z)I(un,vn)1n(|(wun)|2+|(zvn)|2),(w,z)N.

    For n large enough, by Lemma 3.1 and (i)-(ii) of the above, we can get

    C1>0,C2>0,0<C1|un|22+|vn|22C2.

    In the following we shall prove that I(un,vn)0 as n. In fact, we can apply Lemma 2.3 with (u,v)=(un,vn) and (w,z)=δ(Iu(un,vn),Iv(un,vn))I(un,vn)(δ>0). Then can find tn(δ) such that

    (wδ,zδ)=tn(δ)[(un,vn)δ(Iu(un,vn),Iv(un,vn))I(un,vn)]N.

    Thus, we infer from the condition (ii) that

    I(un,vn)I(wδ,zδ)1n(|(wδun)|2+|(zδvn)|2). (3.1)

    On the other hand, by using Taylor expansion we have that

    I(un,vn)I(wδ,zδ)=(1tn(δ))(I(wδ,zδ),(un,vn))+δtn(δ)(I(wδ,zδ),I(un,vn)I(un,vn))+o(δ).

    Dividing by δ>0 and letting δ0, we get

    1n(2+tn(0)(|un|2+|vn|2))tn(0)(I(un,vn),(un,vn))+I(un,vn)=I(un,vn). (3.2)

    Combining (3.1) and (3.2) we conclude that

    I(un,vn)Cn(2+tn(0)).

    We infer from Lemma 2.3 and (un,vn)N that tn(0) is bounded. That is,

    |tn(0)|C.

    Hence we obtain that

    I(un,vn)0asn. (3.3)

    Therefore, by choosing a subsequence if necessary, we have that

    (un,vn)(u0,v0)inHandI(u0,v0)=0,

    and

    c0I(u0,v0)=14(|u0|22+|v0|22)Ω(f1u0+f2v0)dxlimnI(un,vn)=c0.

    Consequently, we infer that

    (un,vn)(u0,v0)inH,I(u0,v0)=c0=infNI.

    From Lemma 2.1 and (3.3), we deduce that (u0,v0)N+.

    (2) In order to get the conclusion, it suffices to prove that (w,z)H,ε>0, if (w,z)<ε, then I(u0w,v0z)I(u0,v0). In fact, notice that for every (w,z)H with Ω(f1u+f2v)dx>0, we infer from Lemma 2.1 that

    I(su,sv)I(t1u,t1v),s[0,t0].

    In particular, for (u0,v0)N+, we have

    t2=1<t0=[Ω(|u0|2+|v0|2)dx3Ω(μ1|u0|4+μ2|v0|4+2βu20v20)dx]12.

    Let ε>0 sufficiently small. Then we infer that for (w,z)<ε

    1<[Ω(|(u0w)|2+|(v0z)|2)dx3Ω(μ1|u0w|4+μ2|v0z|4+2β(u0w)2(v0z)2)dx]12=˜t0. (3.4)

    From Lemma 2.3, let t(w,z)>0 satisfy t(w,z)(u0w,v0z)N for every (w,z)<ε. Since t(w,z)1 as (w,z)0, we can assume that

    t(w,z)<˜t0,(w,z)<ε.

    Hence we obtain that t(w,z)(u0w,v0z)N+ and

    I(s(u0w),s(v0z))I(t(w,z)(u0w),t(w,z)(v0z))I(u0,v0),0<s<˜t0.

    From (3.4) we can take s=1 and conclude

    I(u0w,v0z)I(u0,v0),(w,z)H,(w,z)<ε.

    This finishes the proof.

    Proof of Theorem 1.1. From Lemma 3.2, we know that (u0,v0) is the critical point of I.

    In this section we focus on the proof of Theorem 1.2. The main difficulty here is the lack of compactness(due to the embedding HL4(Ω)×L4(Ω) is noncompact). Motivated by previous works of [27,29,37], we shall seek the local compactness. Then by using the Mountain pass principle to find the second nontrivial solution of equation (1.7). The pioneering paper [29] has used this methods to find the second solution of the scalar Schrödinger equation. To this purpose, we first begin with the following lemma to find the threshold to recover the compactness.

    Lemma 4.1. For every sequence (un,vn)H satisfying

    (i) I(un,vn)cwithc<c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2}, where c0 is defined in (1.12), S is the best Sobolevconstant of the imbedding from H10(Ω) to L4(Ω),

    (ii)I(un,vn)0asn.

    Then {(un,vn)} has a convergent subsequence. This means thatthe (PS)c condition holds for all levelc<c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2}.

    Proof. From condition (i) and (ii), it is easy to verify that (un,vn) is bounded. So, for the subsequence {(un,vn)}(which we still call {(un,vn)}, we can find a (w0,z0)H such that (un,vn)(w0,z0) in H. Then from the condition (ii), we obtain that

    (I(w0,z0),(w,z))=0,(w,z)H.

    That is, (w0,z0) is a solution in H. Moreover, (w0,z0)N and I(w0,z0)c0. Let

    (un,vn)=(w0+wn,z0+zn).

    Then (wn,zn)(0,0) in H. Then it suffices to prove that

    (wn,zn)(0,0)inH. (4.1)

    We use the indirect argument. Assume that (4.1) does not hold. Then we divide the following three cases to find the contradiction.

    Case 1: wn0 and zn0 in H. Since (un,vn) is bounded, it follows that

    Ωw2nz2ndx=o(1).

    by (1.7), we can get

    c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2}>I(un,vn)=I(w0+wn,z0+zn)=I(w0,z0)+12Ω|zn|2dxμ24Ω|zn|4dx+o(1)c0+12|zn|22μ24|zn|44+o(1),

    and then

    12|zn|22μ24|zn|44<S24μ2. (4.2)

    We infer from the condition (ii) that

    o(1)=(I(un,vn),(un,vn))=(I(w0,z0),(w0,z0))+|zn|22μ2|zn|44+o(1).

    That is, we get

    |zn|22=μ2|zn|44+o(1).

    By using the embedding from H10(Ω) to L4(Ω), we get

    μ2|zn|44=|zn|22S|zn|24+o(1).

    Since zn0, we infer that |zn|24S/μ2++o(1). That is,

    |zn|44S2μ22+o(1).

    Hence we get

    12|zn|22μ24|zn|44=μ24|zn|44+o(1)14S2μ2. (4.3)

    This contradicts with the fact (4.2).

    Case 2: wn0 and zn0 in H. This can be accomplished by using same argument as in the proof of the Case 1.

    Case 3: wn0 and zn0 in H. Similar to the Case 1, we infer from condition (ii) that

    o(1)=(I(un,vn),(un,0))=|un|2μ1|un|44βΩu2nv2ndxΩf1undx=(I(w0,z0),(w0,0))+|wn|22μ1|wn|44βΩw2nz2ndx+o(1).

    Then we have

    |wn|22=μ1|wn|44+βΩw2nz2ndx+o(1). (4.4)

    One infers from Hölder and Sobolev inequality that

    S|wn|24|wn|22=μ1|wn|44+βΩw2nz2ndx+o(1)μ1|wn|44+β|wn|24|zn|24+o(1). (4.5)

    Since wn0, we have

    Sμ1|wn|24+β|zn|24+o(1)μ1(|wn|24+|zn|24)+o(1). (4.6)

    Similarly, we obtain that

    Sμ2|zn|24+β|wn|24+o(1)μ2(|wn|24+|zn|24)+o(1). (4.7)

    Thus, we conclude that

    |wn|24+|zn|24max{Sμ1,Sμ2}+o(1). (4.8)

    On the other hand, we infer from the condition (ii) that

    o(1)=(I(un,vn),(un,vn))=|un|2+|vn|2μ1|un|44μ2|vn|442βΩu2nv2ndxΩf1undxΩf2vndx=(I(w0,z0),(w0,z0))+|wn|22+|zn|22μ1|wn|44μ2|zn|442βΩw2nz2ndx+o(1). (4.9)

    From (4.6)-(4.9), we deduce that

    c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2}>I(un,vn)=I(w0+wn,z0+zn)=I(w0,z0)+12|wn|22+12|zn|2214(μ1|wn|44+μ2|zn|44+2βΩw2nz2ndx)+o(1)c0+14(μ1|wn|44+μ2|zn|44+2βΩw2nz2ndx)+o(1)c0+S4(|wn|24+|zn|24)+o(1)c0+14max{S2μ1,S2μ2}+o(1).

    This is a contradiction.

    In order to applying Lemma 4.1 to get the compactness, we need to prove the following inequality

    c1=infNI<c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2}.

    Let

    uε(x)=εε2+|x|2ε>0, xR4

    be an extremal function for the Sobolev inequality in R4. Let uε,a=u(xa) for xΩ and the cut-off function ξaC0(Ω) with ξa0 and ξa=1 near a. We set

    Uε,a(x)=ξa(x)uε,a(x),xR4.

    Following [37], we let Ω1Ω be a positive measure set such that u0>0,v0>0, where c0=I(u0,v0) is given in Theorem 1.1. Then we have the following conclusion.

    Lemma 4.2. For every R>0, and a.e. aΩ1, there existsε0=ε0(R,a)>0, such that

    min{I(u0+RUε,a,v0),I(u0,v0+RUε,a)}<c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2} (4.10)

    for every 0<ε<ε0.

    Proof. As in [37], a direct computation shows that

    I(u0+RUε,a,v0)=12|u0|22+RΩu0Uε,adx+R22|Uε,a|22+12|v0|22μ14(|u0|44+R4|Uε,a|44+4RΩu30Uε,adx+4R3ΩU3ε,au0dx)μ24|v0|44β2Ω(u20v20+2Ru0v20Uε,a+R2U2ε,av20)dxΩ(f1u0+f2v0)dxRΩfUε,adx+o(ε). (4.11)

    We infer from [27] that

    |Uε,a|22=F+O(ε2)and|Uε,a|44=G+O(ε4), (4.12)

    where

    F=R4|u1(x)|2dx,G=R4dx(1+|x|2)4,S=FG12

    If we let u0=0 outside Ω, then

    ΩU3ε,au0dx=R4u0ξa(x)ε3(ε2+|xa|2)3dx=εR4u0ξa(x)1ε4φ(xε)dx

    where

    φ(x)=1(1+|x|2)3L1(R4).

    Set

    E=R41(1+|x|2)3dx.

    Then we can derive

    R4u0ξa(x)1ε4φ(xε)dxu0(a)E.

    Since (u0,v0) is the critical point of I, it follows that

    Ω(|u0|2+|v0|2)dxΩ(μ1u40+μ2v40+2βu20v20)dxΩ(f1u0+f2v0)dx=0. (4.13)

    We infer from (4.11)-(4.13) that

    I(u0+RUε,a,v0)=I(u0,v0)+R22FR44μ1Gμ1R3ΩU3ε,au0dxβR22ΩU2ε,av20dx+o(ε)c0+R22FR44μ1Gμ1εR3Eu0(a)+o(ε). (4.14)

    In order to get the upper bound of (4.14), we define

    q1(s)=F2s2μ1G4s4kεs3,k=μ1Eu0(a)>0,

    and

    q2(s)=F2s2μ1G4s4.

    It is easy to get the maximum of q2(s) is achieved at s0=(Fμ1G)12. Let the maximum of q1(s) is achieved at sε, so we can let sε=(1δε)s0, and get δε0(ε0). Substituting sε=(1δε)s0 into q1(s)=0, we can get

    FF(1δε)2=3s0(1δε)kε.

    As in [29], we infer that

    δεε,ε0.

    Then we can get the upper bound estimation of I(u0+RUε,a,v0):

    I(u0+RUε,a,v0)c0+R22FR44μ1GkεR3+o(ε)c0+[(1δε)s0]22F[(1δε)s0]44μ1Gkε[(1δε)s0]3+o(ε)=c0+(s202Fs404μ1G)+(s40μ1Gs20F)δεkεs30+o(ε)<c0+S24μ1+o(ε).

    Thus, for ε0>0 small, we get

    I(u0+RUε,a,v0)<c0+S24μ1.

    Similarly, we obtain that

    I(u0,v0+RUε,a)<c0+S24μ2.

    So, we prove

    min{I(u0+RUε,a,v0),I(u0,v0+RUε,a)}<c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2},0<ε<ε0.

    This finishes the proof.

    Without loss of generality, from above Lemma 4.2 we can assume

    I(u0+RUε,a,v0)<c0+S24μ1,R>0,0<ε<ε0.

    Now we are ready to prove Theorem 1.2.

    Proof of Theorem 1.2. It is clear that there exists an uniqueness of t1>0 such that

    (t1u,t1v)NandI(t1u,t1v)=maxtt0I(t1u,t1v), (u,v)H, (u,v)=1.

    Moreover, t1(u,v) is a continuous function of (u,v), and N divides H into two components H1 and H2, which are disconnect with each other. Let

    H1={(u,v)=(0,0)or(u,v):(u,v)<t1((u,v)(u,v))}andH2={(u,v):(u,v)>t1((u,v)(u,v))}.

    Obviously, we have HN=H1H2. Furthermore, we obtain that N+H1 for (u0,v0)H1. We choose a constant C0 such that

    0<t1(u,v)C0,(u,v)=1.

    In the following we deduce that

    (w,z)=(u0+R0Uε,a,v0)H2, (4.15)

    where R0=(1F|C20(u0,v0)2)12+1. Since

    (w,z)2=(u0,v0)2+R20|Uε,a|2+2R0Ω|u0||Uε,a|dx=(u0,v0)2+R20F+o(1)>C20[t1((w,z)(w,z))]2

    for ε>0 small enough. We fix ε>0 small to make both (4.10) and (4.15) hold by the choice of R0 and aΩ1. Set

    Γ1={γC([0,1],H):γ(0)=(u0,v0),γ(1)=(u0+R0Uε,a,v0)}.

    We take h(t)=(u0+tR0Uε,a,v0). Then h(t)Γ1. From Lemma 4.1, we conclude that

    c=infhΓ1maxt[0,1]I(h(t))<c0+S24μ1.

    Since the range of every hΓ1 intersect N, we have

    c1=infNIc<c0+S24μ1. (4.16)

    Set

    Γ2={γC([0,1],H):γ(0)=(u0,v0),γ(1)=(u0,v0+R0Uε,a)}.

    By using the same argument, we can get similar results

    c=infhΓ2maxt[0,1]I(h(t))<c0+S24μ2.

    Moreover, since the range of every hΓ2 intersect N, we have

    c1=infNIc<c0+S24μ2. (4.17)

    Combining (4.16) and (4.17), we obtain that

    c1<c0+14min{S2μ1,S2μ2}.

    Next by using Mountain-Pass lemma(see [36]) to obtain that there exist {(un,vn)}N such that

    I(un)c1,I((un,vn))0.

    From Lemma 4.1, we can obtain a subsequence (still denote {(un,vn)}) of {(un,vn)}, and (u1,v1)H such that

    (un,vn)(u1,v1)inH.

    Hence, we get (u1,v1) is a critical point for I,(u1,v1)N and I(u1,v1)=c1.

    The authors thank the referees's nice suggestions to improve the paper. This work was supported by NNSF of China (Grants 11971202, 12071185), Outstanding Young foundation of Jiangsu Province No. BK20200042.

    The authors declare there is no conflicts of interest.



    [1] S. Timotheou, O. Miliou, Y. Dimitriadis, S. V. Sobrino, N. Giannoutsou, R. Cachia, et al., Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review, Educ. Inf. Technol., 28 (2023), 6695–6726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11431-8 doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11431-8
    [2] P. Twining, J. Raffaghelli, P. Albion, D. Knezek, Moving education into the digital age: The contribution of teachers' professional development, J. Comput. Assisted Learn., 29 (2013), 426–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12031 doi: 10.1111/jcal.12031
    [3] J. Engelbrecht, S. Llinares, M. C. Borba, Transformation of the mathematics classroom with the internet, ZDM-Math. Educ., 52 (2020), 825–841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01176-4 doi: 10.1007/s11858-020-01176-4
    [4] M. Beardsley, L. Albo, P. Aragon, D. Hernandez-Leo, Emergency education effects on teacher abilities and motivation to use digital technologies, Br. J. Educ. Technol., 52 (2021), 1455–1477. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13101 doi: 10.1111/bjet.13101
    [5] S. J. Hegedus, L. Moreno-Armella, The emergence of mathematical structures, Educ. Stud. Math., 77 (2011), 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9297-7 doi: 10.1007/s10649-010-9297-7
    [6] C. Zhou, Children's cognitive abilities in the context of the digital transformation of basic education, Interact. Learn. Environ., 30 (2022), 1–13.
    [7] MOE, Standards of Mathematics Curriculum for Compulsory Educaiton (2022 year version)(in Chinese), Beijing Normal University Publishing House, Beijing, China, 2022.
    [8] NCTM, Principles and Standards for School Mathematics, NCTM, Reston, VA, 2000.
    [9] O. Birgin, F. Topuz, Effect of the GeoGebra software-supported collaborative learning environment on seventh grade student' geometry achievement, retention and attitudes, J. Educ. Res., 114 (2021), 474–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2021.1983505 doi: 10.1080/00220671.2021.1983505
    [10] O. Birgin, K. U. Yazici, The effect of GeoGebra software-supported mathematics instruction on eighth-grade students' conceptual understanding and retention, J. Comput. Assisted Learn., 37 (2021), 925–939. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12532 doi: 10.1111/jcal.12532
    [11] R. Bozic, D. Takaci, G. Stankov, Influence of dynamic software environment on students' achievement of learning functions with parameters, Interact. Learn. Environ., 29 (2019), 655–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1602842 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1602842
    [12] E. Cekmez, Investigating the effect of computer-supported instruction on students' understanding of different representations of two-variable inequalities, Interact. Learn. Environ., 31 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1926288 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2021.1926288
    [13] M. Demir, Y. Zengin, The effect of a technology-enhanced collaborative learning environment on secondary school students' mathematical reasoning: A mixed method design, Educ. Inf. Technol., 28 (2023), 9855–9883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11587-x doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-11587-x
    [14] S. Radović, M. Radojičić, K. Veljković, M. Marić, Examining the effects of Geogebra applets on mathematics learning using interactive mathematics textbook, Interact. Learn. Environ., 28 (2020), 32–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1512001 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2018.1512001
    [15] M. S. Uwurukundo, J. F. Maniraho, M. T. Rwibasira, Effect of GeoGebra software on secondary school students' achievement in 3-D geometry, Educ. Inf. Technol., 27 (2022), 5749–5765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10852-1 doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10852-1
    [16] H. Zulnaidi, E. Oktavika, R. Hidayat, Effect of use of GeoGebra on achievement of high school mathematics students, Educ. Inf. Technol., 25 (2020), 51–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09899-y doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-09899-y
    [17] D. Dalby, M. Swan, Using digital technology to enhance formative assessment in mathematics classrooms, Br. J. Educ. Technol., 50 (2019), 832–845. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12606 doi: 10.1111/bjet.12606
    [18] D. Juandi, Y. S. Kusumah, M. Tamur, K. S. Perbowo, T. T. Wijaya, A meta-analysis of GeoGebra software decade of assisted mathematics learning: What to learn and where to go?, Heliyon, 7 (2021), e06953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06953 doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06953
    [19] J. S. Pyper, Learning about ourselves: A review of the mathematics teacher in the digital era, Can. J. Sci. Math. Technol. Educ., 17 (2017), 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2017.1297509 doi: 10.1080/14926156.2017.1297509
    [20] A. Baccaglini-Frank, To tell a story, you need a protagonist: How dynamic interactive mediators can fulfill this role and foster explorative participation to mathematical discourse, Educ. Stud. Math., 106 (2021), 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10009-w doi: 10.1007/s10649-020-10009-w
    [21] G. Bozkurt, K. Ruthven, Classroom-based professional expertise: A mathematics teacher's practice with technology, Educ. Stud. Math., 94 (2017), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9732-5 doi: 10.1007/s10649-016-9732-5
    [22] I. F. Rahmadi, Z. Lavicza, S. Arkün Kocadere, T. Houghton, M. Hohenwarter, The strengths and weaknesses of user-generated microgames for assisting learning, Educ. Inf. Technol., 27 (2022), 979–995. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10635-8 doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10635-8
    [23] F. Zhu, B. Xu, The role of dynamic geometry software in teacher-student interactions: Stories from three Chinese mathematics teachers, Sustainability, 15 (2023), 7660. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097660 doi: 10.3390/su15097660
    [24] M. J. Bossé, E. S. Young, A. Bayaga, K. Lynch-Davis, A. DeMarte, C. Fountain, Cognitive processes in problem solving in a dynamic mathematics environment, Int. J. Math. Teach. Learn., 21 (2020), 174–196. https://doi.org/10.4256/ijmtl.v21i2.273 doi: 10.4256/ijmtl.v21i2.273
    [25] M. Cevikbas, G. Kaiser, A systematic review on task design in dynamic and interactive mathematics learning environments (DIMLEs), Mathematics, 9 (2021), 399. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9040399 doi: 10.3390/math9040399
    [26] D. Martinovic, Z. Karadag, Dynamic and interactive mathematics learning environments: The case of teaching the limit concept, Teach. Math. Its Appl., 31 (2012), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrr029 doi: 10.1093/teamat/hrr029
    [27] Z. Yuan, J. Liu, X. Deng, T. Ding, T. T. Wijaya, Facilitating conditions as the biggest factor influencing elementary school teachers' usage behavior of dynamic mathematics software in China, Mathematics, 11 (2023), 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11061536 doi: 10.3390/math11061536
    [28] S. S. Dogruer, D. Akyuz, Mathematical practices of eighth graders about 3D shapes in an argumentation, technology, and design-based classroom environment, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 18 (2020), 1485–1505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10028-x doi: 10.1007/s10763-019-10028-x
    [29] D. Oner, Tracing the change in discourse in a collaborative dynamic geometry environment: From visual to more mathematical, Int. J. Comput Supported Collab. Learn., 11 (2016), 59–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9227-5 doi: 10.1007/s11412-016-9227-5
    [30] A. H. Abdullah, N. S. Misrom, U. H. A. Kohar, M. H. Hamzah, Z. M. Ashari, D. F. Ali, et al., The effects of an inductive reasoning learning strategy assisted by the GeoGebra software on students' motivation for the functional graph Ⅱ topic, IEEE Access, 8 (2020), 143848–143861. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3014202 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3014202
    [31] P. Shadaan, K. E. Leong, Effectiveness of using GeoGebra on students' understanding in learning circles, Malays. Online J. Educ.Technol., 1 (2013), 1–11.
    [32] E. Cekmez, Using dynamic mathematics software to model a real-world phenomenon in the classroom, Interact. Learn. Environ., 28 (2020), 526–538. https://doi.rog/10.1080/10494820.2019.1674882 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1674882
    [33] W. Daher, Middle school students' motivation in solving modelling activities with technology, EURASIA J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., 17 (2021), em1999. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11127 doi: 10.29333/ejmste/11127
    [34] M. Hohenwarter, K. J. Fuchs, Combination of dynamic geometry, algebra and calculus in the software system GeoGebra, in Computer Algebra Systems and Dynamic Geometry Systems in Mathematics Teaching, Proceedings of Sprout-Slecting Conference (Sarvari, Cs. Hrsg.), Pecs, Hungary, (2005), 128–133.
    [35] E. Z. Hutkemri, Impact of using GeoGebra on students' conceptual and procedural knowledge of limit function, Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci., 5 (2014), 873–881. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n23p873 doi: 10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n23p873
    [36] E. Çekmez, B.Ö. Bülbül, An example of the use of dynamic mathematics software to create problem-solving environments that serve multiple purposes, Interact. Learn. Environ., 26 (2018), 654–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1385029 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2017.1385029
    [37] H. Jacinto, S. Carreira, Mathematical problem solving with technology: The techno-mathematical fluency of a student-with-GeoGebra, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 15 (2017), 1115–1136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9728-8 doi: 10.1007/s10763-016-9728-8
    [38] A. Leung, A. M. S. Lee, Students' geometrical perception on a task-based dynamic geometry platform, Educ. Stud. Mathe., 82 (2013), 361–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9433-7 doi: 10.1007/s10649-012-9433-7
    [39] J. Olsson, The contribution of reasoning to the utilization of feedback from software when solving mathematical problems, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 16 (2018), 715–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9795-x doi: 10.1007/s10763-016-9795-x
    [40] R. Ramirez-Ucles, J. F. Ruiz-Hidalgo, Reasoning, representing, and generalizing in geometric proof problems among 8th grade talented students, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 789. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10050789 doi: 10.3390/math10050789
    [41] Q. Tan, Z. Yuan, A framework on mathematical problem solving with technology and its applications (in Chinese), J. Math. Educ., 30 (2021), 48–54
    [42] K. K. Chan, S. W. Leung, Dynamic geometry software improves mathematical achievement: Systematic review and meta-analysis, J. Educ. Comput. Res., 51 (2014), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.51.3.c doi: 10.2190/EC.51.3.c
    [43] A. Sokolowski, Y. Li, V. Willson, The effects of using exploratory computerized environments in grades 1 to 8 mathematics: A meta-analysis of research, Int. J. STEM Educ., 2 (2015), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0022-z doi: 10.1186/s40594-015-0022-z
    [44] A. Dvir, M. Tabach, Learning extrema problems using a non-differential approach in a digital dynamic environment: The case of high-track yet low-achievers, ZDM-Math. Educ., 49 (2017), 785–798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0862-8 doi: 10.1007/s11858-017-0862-8
    [45] R. S. R. da Silva, L. M. Barbosa, M. C. Borba, A. L. A. Ferreira, The use of digital technology to estimate a value of Pi: Teachers' solutions on squaring the circle in a graduate course in Brazil, ZDM-Math. Educ., 53 (2021), 605–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01246-1 doi: 10.1007/s11858-021-01246-1
    [46] M. Turgut, Reinventing geometric linear transformations in a dynamic geometry environment: Multimodal analysis of student reasoning, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 20 (2022), 1203–1223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10185-y doi: 10.1007/s10763-021-10185-y
    [47] M. Turgut, Sense-making regarding matrix representation of geometric transformations in R2: A semiotic mediation perspective in a dynamic geometry environment, ZDM-Math. Educ., 51 (2019), 1199–1214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01032-0 doi: 10.1007/s11858-019-01032-0
    [48] Y. Zengin, Construction of proof of the fundamental theorem of calculus using dynamic mathematics software in the calculus classroom, Educ. Inf. Technol., 27 (2022), 2331–2366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10666-1 doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10666-1
    [49] O. Birgin, H. Acar, The effect of computer-supported collaborative learning using GeoGebra software on 11th grade students' mathematics achievement in exponential and logarithmic functions, Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol., 53 (2022), 872–889. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1788186 doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2020.1788186
    [50] M. Mthethwa, A. Bayaga, M. J. Bossé, D. Williams, GeoGebra for learning and teaching: A parallel investigation, South African J. Educ., 40 (2020), 1669. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v40n2a1669 doi: 10.15700/saje.v40n2a1669
    [51] K. Acikgul, R. Aslaner, Effects of Geogebra supported micro teaching applications and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) game practices on the TPACK levels of prospective teachers, Educ. Inf. Technol., 25 (2020), 2023–2047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10044-y doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-10044-y
    [52] O. Erkek, M. I. Bostan, Prospective middle school mathematics teachers' global argumentation structures, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 17 (2019), 613–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9884-0 doi: 10.1007/s10763-018-9884-0
    [53] S. B. Khoza, A. T. Biyela, Decolonising technological pedagogical content knowledge of first year mathematics students, Educ. Inf. Technol., 25 (2020), 2665–2679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10084-4 doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-10084-4
    [54] N. C. Verhoef, F. Coenders, J. M. Pieters, D. van Smaalen, D. O. Tall, Professional development through lesson study: Teaching the derivative using GeoGebra, Prof. Develop. Educ., 41 (2015), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.886285 doi: 10.1080/19415257.2014.886285
    [55] Y. Zengin, Development of mathematical connection skills in a dynamic learning environment, Educ. Inf. Technol., 24 (2019), 2175–2194. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09870-x doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-09870-x
    [56] Y. Zengin, Effectiveness of a professional development course based on information and communication technologies on mathematics teachers' skills in designing technology-enhanced task, Educ. Inf. Technol., 28 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11728-2 doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-11728-2
    [57] S. Gokce, P. Guner, Dynamics of GeoGebra ecosystem in mathematics education, Educ. Inf. Technol., 27 (2022), 5301–5323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10836-1 doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10836-1
    [58] A. Yohannes, H. L. Chen, GeoGebra in mathematics education: A systematic review of journal articles published from 2010 to 2020, Interact. Learn. Environ., 29 (2021), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2016861 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2021.2016861
    [59] M. D. Gurer, Examining technology acceptance of pre-service mathematics teachers in Turkey: A structural equation modeling approach, Educ. Inf. Technol., 26 (2021), 4709–4729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10493-4 doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10493-4
    [60] K. F. Hollebrands, The role of a dynamic software program for geometry in the strategies high school mathematics students employ, J. Res. Math. Educ., 38 (2007), 164–192. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034955 doi: 10.2307/30034955
    [61] F. Ulusoy, İ. B. Turuş, The mathematical and technological nature of tasks containing the use of dynamic geometry software in middle and secondary school mathematics textbooks, Educ. Inf. Technol., 27 (2022), 11089–11113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11070-z doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11070-z
    [62] K. Ruthven, R. Deaney, S. Hennessy, Using graphing software to teach about algebraic forms: A study of technology-supported practice in secondary-school mathematics, Educ. Stud. Math., 71 (2009), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9176-7 doi: 10.1007/s10649-008-9176-7
    [63] J. Hohenwarter, M. Hohenwarter, Z. Lavicza, Introducing dynamic mathematics software to second school teachers: The case of GeoGebra, J. Comput. Math. Sci. Teach., 28 (2008), 135–146. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.15003.05921 doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15003.05921
    [64] R. Pierce, K. Stacey, Mapping pedagogical opportunities provided by mathematics analysis software, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn., 15 (2010), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-010-9158-6 doi: 10.1007/s10758-010-9158-6
    [65] R. Marrades, Á. Gutiérrez, Proofs produced by secondary school students learning geometry in a dynamic computer environment, Educ. Stud. Math., 44 (2000), 87–125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012785106627 doi: 10.1023/A:1012785106627
    [66] G. G. Nagar, S. Hegedus, C. H. Orrill, High school mathematics teachers' discernment of invariant properties in a dynamic geometry environment, Educ. Stud. Math., 111 (2022), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-022-10144-6 doi: 10.1007/s10649-022-10144-6
    [67] M. S. Alabdulaziz, S. M. Aldossary, S. A. Alyahya, H. M. Althubiti, The effectiveness of the GeoGebra programme in the development of academic achievement and survival of the learning impact of the mathematics among secondary stage students, Educ. Inf. Technol., 26 (2021), 2685–2713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10371-5 doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10371-5
    [68] F. D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly, 13 (1989), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 doi: 10.2307/249008
    [69] F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, P. R. Warshaw, User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models, Manage. Sci., 35 (1989), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
    [70] V. Venkatesh, F. D. Davis, A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies, Manage. Sci., 46 (2000), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
    [71] I. Ajzen, The theory of planned behavior, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Processes, 50 (1991), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
    [72] E. M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, The Free Press, New York, 1963.
    [73] V. Venkatesh, M.G. Morris, G. B. Davis, F. D. Davis, User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly, 27 (2003), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.5555/2017197.2017202 doi: 10.5555/2017197.2017202
    [74] V. Venkatesh, J. Y. L. Thong, X. Xu, Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, MIS Quarterly, 36 (2012), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412 doi: 10.2307/41410412
    [75] A. M. Al-Rahmi, A. Shamsuddin, E. Wahab, W. M. Al-Rahmi, U. Alturki, A. Aldraiweesh, et al., Integrating the role of UTAUT and TTF model to evaluate social media use for teaching and learning in higher education, Front. Public Health, 10 (2022), 905968. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.905968 doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.905968
    [76] L. Wan, S. Xie, A. Shu, Toward an understanding of university students' continued Intention to use MOOCs: When UTAUT model meets TTF model, SAGE Open, 10 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020941858 doi: 10.1177/2158244020941858
    [77] M. D. Williams, N. P. Rana, Y. K. Dwivedi, The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): A literature review, J. Enterp. Inf. Manage., 28 (2015), 443–488. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-09-2014-0088 doi: 10.1108/JEIM-09-2014-0088
    [78] C. M. Chao, Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile learning: An application and extension of the UTAUT model, Front. Psychol., 10 (2019), 1652. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652
    [79] A. Kundu, T. Bej, K. N. Dey, Investigating effects of self-efficacy and infrastructure on teachers' ICT use: An extension of UTAUT, Int. J. Web-Based Learn. Teach. Technol. (IJWLTT), 16 (2021), 21. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJWLTT.20211101.oa10 doi: 10.4018/IJWLTT.20211101.oa10
    [80] A. Clark-Wilson, O. Robutti, M. Thomas, Teaching with digital technology, ZDM-Math. Educ., 52 (2020), 1223–1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01196-0 doi: 10.1007/s11858-020-01196-0
    [81] T. T. Wijaya, Y. Zhou, T. Houghton, R. Weinhandl, Z. Lavicza, F.D. Yusop, Factors affecting the use of digital mathematics textbooks in Indonesia, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 1808. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10111808 doi: 10.3390/math10111808
    [82] Ş. B. Tosuntaş, E. Karadağ, S. Orhan, The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, Comput. Educ., 81 (2015), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.009 doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.009
    [83] V. Venkatesh, H. Bala, Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions, Decis. Sci., 39 (2008), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
    [84] M. A. O. Abbad, Using the UTAUT model to understand students' usage of e-learning systems in developing countries, Educ. Inf. Technol., 26 (2021), 7205–7224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10573-5 doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10573-5
    [85] T. T. Wijaya, R. Weinhandl, Factors influencing students's continuous intentions for using micro-lectures in the post-COVID-19 period: A modification of the UTAUT-2 approach, Electronics, 11 (2022), 1924. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11131924 doi: 10.3390/electronics11131924
    [86] T. T. Wijaya, Y. Cao, R. Weinhandl, E. Yusron, Z. Lavicza, Applying the UTAUT model to understand factors affecting micro-lecture usage by mathematics teachers in China, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 1008. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071008 doi: 10.3390/math10071008
    [87] T. Zhou, Y. Lu, B. Wang, Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption, Comput. Hum. Behav., 26 (2010), 760–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.013 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.013
    [88] H. J. Lai, Investigating older adults' decisions to use mobile devices for learning, based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, Int. Learn. Environ., 28 (2020), 890–901. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1546748 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2018.1546748
    [89] B. Šumak, A. Šorgo, The acceptance and use of interactive whiteboards among teachers: Differences in UTAUT determinants between pre- and post-adopters, Comput. Hum. Behav., 64 (2016), 602–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.037 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.037
    [90] A. Gunasinghe, J. A. Hamid, A. Khatibi, S. M. F. Azam, The viability of UTAUT-3 in understanding the lecturer's acceptance and use of virtual learning environments, Int. J. Technol. Enhanced Learn., 12 (2020), 458–481. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2020.110056 doi: 10.1504/IJTEL.2020.110056
    [91] J. Kim, K. S. S. Lee, Conceptual model to predict Filipino teachers' adoption of ICT-based instruction in class: Using the UTAUT model, Asia Pac. J. Educ., 42 (2022), 699–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2020.1776213 doi: 10.1080/02188791.2020.1776213
    [92] A. Bandura, The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory, J. Soc. Clin. Psychol., 4 (1986), 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.359 doi: 10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.359
    [93] J. Wu, H. Du, Toward a better understanding of behavioral intention and system usage constructs, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 21 (2012), 680–698. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2012.15 doi: 10.1057/ejis.2012.15
    [94] W. H. Loo, P. H. P. Yeow, S. C. Chong, User acceptance of Malaysian government multipurpose smartcard applications, Gov. Inf. Q., 26 (2009), 358–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2008.07.004 doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2008.07.004
    [95] S. Lakhal, H. Khechine, J. Mukamurera, Explaining persistence in online courses in higher education: A difference-in-differences analysis, Int. J. Educ. Technol. Higher Educ., 18 (2021), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00251-4 doi: 10.1186/s41239-021-00251-4
    [96] V. Marinković, A. Đorđević, Z. Kalinić, The moderating effects of gender on customer satisfaction and continuance intention in mobile commerce: A UTAUT-based perspective, Technol. Anal. Strategic Manage., 32 (2020), 306–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1655537 doi: 10.1080/09537325.2019.1655537
    [97] S. J. Jang, M. F. Tsai, Reasons for using or not using interactive whiteboards: Perspectives of Taiwanese elementary mathematics and science teachers, Australas. J. Educ. Technol., 28 (2012), 1451–1465. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.781 doi: 10.14742/ajet.781
    [98] S. Hu, K. Laxman, K. Lee, Exploring factors affecting academics' adoption of emerging mobile technologies: An extended UTAUT perspective, Educ. Inf. Technol., 25 (2020), 4615–4635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10171-x doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10171-x
    [99] Z. Yuan, S. Li, Developing prospective mathematics teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A case of normal distribution, in The 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education, (2012), 5804–5813.
    [100] C. Y. Lee, M. J. Chen, Developing a questionnaire on technology-integrated mathematics instruction: A case study of the AMA training course in Xinjiang and Taiwan, Br. J. Educ. Technol., 46 (2016), 1287–1303. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12339 doi: 10.1111/bjet.12339
    [101] K. Sungur Gül, H. Ateş, An examination of the effect of technology-based STEM education training in the framework of technology acceptance model, Educ. Inf. Technol., 28 (2023), 8761–8787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11539-x doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11539-x
    [102] W. W. Chin, The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling, in Mordern Methods for Business Research, Erlbaum, (1998), 295–358.
    [103] J. F. Hair, C. M. Ringle, M. Starstedt, PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet, J. Mark. Theory Practice, 19 (2011), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202 doi: 10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
    [104] J. F. Hair, M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, J. A. Mena, An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research, J. Acad. Mark Sci., 40 (2012), 414–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6 doi: 10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6
    [105] J. F. Hair, J. J. Risher, M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM, Eur. Business Rev., 31 (2019), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
    [106] J. F. Hair, G. T. M. Hult, C.M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 3rd edition, Sage Publications, Thousand oaks, CA, 2022.
    [107] J. F. Hair, M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, S. P. Gudergan, Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd edition, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2023.
    [108] H. M. Lin, M. H. Lee, J. C. Liang, H. Y. Chang, P. Huang, C. C. Tsai, A review of using partial least square structural equation modeling in e-learning research, Br. J. Educ. Technol., 51 (2020), 1354–1372. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12890 doi: 10.1111/bjet.12890
    [109] H. Wold, Partial least squares, in Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, (Eds. S. Kotz and N. L. Johnson), Wiley, (1985), 581–591.
    [110] Z. Karadag, D. McDougall, GeoGebra as a cognitive tool: Where cognitive theories and technology meet, in Model-Centered Learning: Pathways to Mathematical Understanding Using GeoGebra, (Eds. L. Bu and R. Schoen), Sense Publishers, (2011), 169–181.
    [111] Z. A. Reis, S. Ozdemir, Using GeoGebra as an information technology tool: Parabola teaching, Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci., 9 (2010), 565–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.198 doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.198
    [112] R. Ziatdinov, J. R. Valles, Synthesis of modeling, visualization, and programming in GeoGebra as an effective approach for teaching and learning STEM topics, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10030398 doi: 10.3390/math10030398
    [113] M. Pittalis, Extending the technology acceptance model to evaluate teachers' intention to use dynamic geometry software in geometry teaching, Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol., 52 (2021), 1385–1404. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1766139 doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2020.1766139
    [114] Z. Yuan, M. Milner-Bolotin, A study of a TPACK-based subject-specific educational technology course and its implications: The case of "teaching mathematics and science through technology" course at the University of British Columbia (in Chinese), J. Math. Educ., 29 (2020), 23–28
    [115] Z. Drezner, O. Turel, D. Zerom, A modified Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for normality, Commun. Stat. Simul. Comput., 39 (2010), 693–704. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610911003615816 doi: 10.1080/03610911003615816
    [116] B. M. Byrne, Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, 3rd edition, Routledge, New York, 2016.
    [117] M. A. Moteri, M. Alojail, Factors influencing the supply chain management in e-health using UTAUT model, Electron. Res. Arch., 31 (2023), 2855–2877. https://doi.org/10.3934/era.2023144 doi: 10.3934/era.2023144
    [118] J. M. Santos-Jaén, A. León-Gómez, D. Ruiz-Palomo, F. García-Lopera, M. D. V. Martínez, Exploring information and communication technologies as driving forces in hotel SMEs performance: Influence of corporate social responsibility, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 3629. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10193629 doi: 10.3390/math10193629
    [119] M. D. Valls Martínez, P. A. Martín-Cervantes, A. M. Sánchez Pérez, M. D. Martínez Victoria, Learning mathematics of financial operations during the COVID-19 era: An assessment with partial least squares structural equation modeling, Mathematics, 9 (2021), 2120. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9172120 doi: 10.3390/math9172120
    [120] T. T. Wijaya, B. Yu, F. Xu, Z. Yuan, M. Mailizar, Analysis of factors affecting academic performance of mathematics education doctoral students: A structural equation modeling approach, Int. J. Environ. Res. Pub. Health, 20 (2023), 4518. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054518 doi: 10.3390/ijerph20054518
    [121] L. J. Cronbach, Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrika, 16 (1951), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555 doi: 10.1007/BF02310555
    [122] T. K. Dijkstra, J. Henseler, Consistent partial least squares path modeling, MIS Q., 39 (2015), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02 doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02
    [123] C. E. Werts, R. L. Linn, K. G. Jöreskog, Intraclass reliability estimates: Testing structural assumptions, Educ. Psychol. Meas., 34 (1974), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400104 doi: 10.1177/001316447403400104
    [124] C. Fornell, D. F. Larcker, Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, J. Mark. Res., 18 (1981), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104
    [125] J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling, J. Acad. Mark. Sci., 43 (2015), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
    [126] J. Henseler, G. Hubona, P. A. Ray, Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines, Ind. Manage. Data Syst., 116 (2016), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382 doi: 10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382
    [127] P. M. Bentler, EQS Structural Equations Program Manual, CA: Multivariate Software, Encino, CA, 1995.
    [128] P. M. Bentler, D. G. Bonett, Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures, Psychol. Bull., 88 (1980), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
    [129] F. Schuberth, M. E. Rademaker, J. Henseler, Assessing the overall fit of composite models estimated by partial least squares path modeling, Eur. J. Mark., 57 (2023), 1678–1702. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-08-2020-0586 doi: 10.1108/EJM-08-2020-0586
    [130] G. Shmueli, M. Sarstedt, J. F. Hair, J. H. Cheah, H. Ting, S. Vaithilingam, et al., Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict, Eur. J. Mark., 53 (2019), 2322-2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189 doi: 10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
    [131] J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, R. R. Sinkovics, The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing, in New Challenges to International Marketing, (Eds. R. R. Sinkovics and P. N. Ghauri), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, (2009), 277–319.
    [132] W. W. Chin, J. Dibbern, A permutation-based procedure for multi-group PLS analysis: Results of tests of differences on simulated data and a cross cultural analysis of the sourcing of information system services between Germany and the USA, (Eds. V. Esposito Vinzi, et al.), Springer, Berlin, (2010).
    [133] M. Sarstedt, J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, Multigroup analysis in partial least squares (PLS) path modeling: Alternative methods and empirical results, in Measurement and Research Methods in International Marketing, (Eds. M. Sarstedt, M. Schwaiger and C. R. Taylor), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, (2011), 195–218.
    [134] J. M. Bland, D. G. Altman, Multiple significance tests: The Bonferroni method, BMJ, 310 (1995), 170. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.310.6973.170 doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6973.170
    [135] J. F. Hair, W. Black, B. Babin, R. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th edition, Cengage Learning EMEA, Hampshire, United Kingdom, 2019.
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(3066) PDF downloads(253) Cited by(11)

Figures and Tables

Figures(2)  /  Tables(17)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog