MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606474170 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v7n2p14

Research on the Organizational Characteristics of Good High School Students’ Mathematical Cognitive Structure Based on the Network Block-Modeling Analysis

2017· article· en· W2606474170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dandan Sun, Zezhong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlock (permutation group theory)TrigonometryCognitionRelevance (law)Computer scienceTrigonometric functionsBasis (linear algebra)PsychologyScale (ratio)Mathematics educationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through the direct detection and quantitative analysis of 44 concepts related to trigonometric functions in the mathematical cognitive structure of the 213 students in grade one in senior middle school, this paper finds that the mathematical cognitive structure of senior high school students has the following characteristics: In the cognitive structure of the mind, knowledge can be divided into different blocks according to the degree of relevance, the basis and the scale of the blocks, the degree of interaction in the block and between the blocks are not the same. The knowledge in a good cognitive structure should be organized in the form of blocks, and the blocks have a more scientific basis. The members in block have more obvious common features and each block is relatively large and covers more knowledge points. The block is closely linked, in addition, there must be a higher intensity of the link between the blocks, which can make the entire network of knowledge as a whole, and then it is conducive to the flow of information.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicCognitive Science and MappingFrench-language works237,207